F « © ■ • 



0_ A 



%ii 




-life j. v , .fli 



V*'^*^ "V* 7 ^*^ 



4 .417 









o" ft o " • ♦ v 




♦ ^ A* * 

- 




8 * J 



4 ^ V 






♦ A 





'O • ft 




> .A* - « • • * 



^ • o w o 



^ ^^^^ ^w*/ 



REPLY 



OF 



ROBERT WICKLIFFE, 



TO 



ROBERT J. BRECKINRIDGE. 



LEXINGTON, KY. 
PRINTED AT THE OBSERVER & REPORTER OFFICE, 



184L 



TO THE FREEMEN OF THE COUNTY OF FAYETTE. 



The Rev. Robert J. Breckinridge, who, on the 7th of October, 1840, announced to 
you that he was here by the Providence of God, and after prayerfully taking counsel 
from above, had determined that on the 12th of said month, being County Court day, 
he would meet me, face to face, before you, and vindicate his innocence and prove me a 
slanderer, has, after a period of nearly twelve months, by the instigation of the Devil, 
again brought himself into notice, not by meeting me, face to face, before the tribunal 
he once selected, but by meanly pouring forth his filth on me through the prostituted 
columns of the Lexington Intelligencer and the Louisville Journal. 

Mr. Breckinridge knew how he fared in his rencounter with me before you last year* 
and anticipated too well what would be his fate if he dared again to meet you and me in 
open day, to make another effort to pour forth his malignity and falsehood, and therefore 
has chosen the medium of two papers into which he knew I could get no reply to hia 
falsehoods and abuse, if I would deign to address him personally, or condescend to 
accept of the columns of the vile sewers of filth and scandal he has chosen to resort to, 
to glut his malice and circulate his slanders. Yet shall Mr. Breckinridge not escape; 
and, however much I regret my condition in being again compelled to notice that indi- 
vidual in any way, he has betrayed too much impudence, under the cover of those 
prostituted presses, in circulating his falsehoods, to allow me what I most sincerely 
desired, never again to trouble you or myself with a remark about him. I know many 
have advised me to silence, and to leave the wretched hypocrite to sink under the weight 
of his own vileness and the castigations his impudence and falsehoods have brought upon 
him from other and more able pens than. mine. No friend I have, my countrymen, can 
be more mortified than I am myself, that ill fortune has brought me into such a situation, 
that I have to contend with a creature so reckless and destitute of all truth, and whose 
impudence and associations embolden him to use language towards an adversary too in- 
decent to receive a reply in the usual style of a gentleman. I know, full well, that he 
that wrestles with a skunk must receive some of its odour. Of this, my adversary is 
well apprised, and one great aim he seems to have bad in view; in his last address, has 
been to play the foul-mouthed blackguard in such style that I could not answer him with- 
out personal degradation. I know that in noticing his billingsgate, T do myself no 
good; but, in again nailing him to the post as a counterfeit and a hypocrite, not only a 
disgrace to his church but to his species, I hope to do some good to others on whom he 
audaciously pours his venom, and not a little good to that chureh which harbors within 
her bosom a miscreant that has brought her to the very verge of dissolution, and whose 
name will stand upon her annals a disgrace and reproach to all Christians with whom he 
is permitted to associate. 

Before I proceed to notice the pretended defence of the gentleman, it will be necessary 
that the reader shall be put right as to the origin of my difficulty with this pious son of 
the church, who, in spite of facts, declares he is only defending himself from mjp 
attacks on him. 



4 



He states that in his attack on me^ in 1830, he was only defending himself and his 
party against my Circular addressed to you, my then constituents. Is this true or false! 
1 answer false, and he knows it. In that circular there is not one word or sentence that 
imputes to any set of men or any individual, errors of the heart; there is not one harsh 
or discourteous expression in it; neither the gentleman nor his pretended party are re- 
ferred to, nor was such party even known at the time to me. The circular gives a faithful 
outline of my conduct as your Senator; and among other things, stated that I had oppos- 
ed the Convention Bill, fearing that it would bring up the unpleasant subject of slavery. 
Of the individual, Robert J. Breckinridge, I spoke not, nor do I believe that he was, at 
the date of the circular, an emancipator. But the gentleman having become tired of. 
the restraints his hypocrisy imposed upon him in the church, determined, about that-, 
time, to again launch out into the field of politics. He intended to play; the double- 
game of shewing out a Clay man in politics, but to be elected by obtaining the Jackson-, 
votes against Clarke, for Congress, and to get the Jackson votes, he supposed it neces- 
sary to have a row with me. In his new candidateship, he presented himself a Clay 
man, but my enemy; and finding no other subject about which to raise a quarrel with 
me, he commenced an assault upon me first about my anti-abolition opinions, and, 
secondly, for my vote on the road bill, and to let the world, particularly the Presbyte- 
rians, know that he was a great Sabbath saint, charged himself with having signed a 
petition to stop the Sunday mails. When I first heard the gentleman had joined the 
negro party, and was the author of his renowned seven numbers, I was more incredulous 
and surprised than I should have been if he had turned horse thief or joined a band of 
highway robbers. Yet, when compelled to defend myself from the written and paroL 
attacks of the gentleman, I did it respectfully, making no assaults or charges against him 
whatever, nor did one angry or unkind expression escape me, either publicly or privately, 
relative to either the gentleman or his deceitful and unmanly attack on me. As I have 
heretofore stated, so silent was I on his outrageous conduct towards me, that even my, 
own household, up to the day of the election, did not know that I should vote against 
the gentleman. Yet, this man has ever pretended that my defeating of his election in 
1830, was the sole foundation for his malignant persecutions of me. But the whole- 
people of this county are my witnesses against him, that there is not, and cannot be- 
found, a human being that I either urged or influenced not to vote for him; yet, pending 
the election, as I before stated, this malignant biped declared that if be were not elected, 
he would pursue me with his vengeance through life, and the same fiendish purpose has 
he repeatedly avowed since his defeat. Unwilling to have an out-break with the crea- 
ture, I continued to observe towards him, as I always had, the most strict silence, hoping 
never to have further transactions with him, and, under the providence of God, never 
even to see him, when in an evil moment, I dropt to his brother William a very kind 
letter, inviting him to come and see me, and I would immediately secure to his father's 
heirs, five thousand dollars, from the executors of Col. Nicholas, in part satisfaction for 
monies paid by his father's executors, for Col. Nicholas to Lee's executors. For this 
offer, made in a spirit of kindness, the reverend gentleman took occasion to write to me 
a most insolent and abusive letter, fraught not only with many falsehoods which he 
knew to be such, but with his accustomed filthy and foul-mouthed epithets. To this 
letter, I wrote a reply, from which he has made occasionally, not only garbled but false 
and counterfeit extracts. Here began, and here closed our written correspondence;,, 
until the fall of the year 1840. 

After the discussions of the gentleman, on the rights of negroes, in 1830, and the 
trials, condemnations and executions of slaves in the county, the fruits of the gentle- 
man's negro labors, the county of Fayette enjoyed a repose from negro emancipators, 
and exemption from negro insurrections and crimes, until the summer of 1840, and.until 
my son became a condidate for the Legislature, when a negro party was formed, with a 
view to defeat his election and to obtain a vote of censure on my conduct. Whether the 



5 



gentleman was at the bottom of the intrigue, I know not; but one thing is well known, 
that is, that many of his partisans were of the party, and now constitute his principal list of 
certificate men. Another thing is known, and that is, that as soon as it was ascer- 
tained that I had resigned, the gentleman was herein proper person, and took the 
stump in defence of the party, who surrounded him and worshipped him as though he 
was, what he professed to be, sent from above. 

The gentleman, in his proclamation, declared that, after taking counsel of God, he 
had determined, at the Court house, in a public speech, to refute the slanders I had 
uttered against him, in my resignation speech. According to promise, the gentleman, 
after a good deal of manceuvering by his jockies and keepers, presented himself and 
commenced his harrangue; but as I had not uttered one word or sentence, in that speech, 
of a personal character, towards the gentleman — had in no manner detracted from his 
character as a speaker — had not even spoken of the gentleman's private life or habits,, 
in any way — in fine, as I had uttered no one word that one gentleman might not have 
spoken of another, without giving offence — as I had only stated what he dare not deny, 
that he had, in 1830, first published certain essays on negro rights, and then maintained 
the same doctrine before you, by addressing you through the canvass of that year — the 
gentleman, when he commenced, found himself wholly at a loss how to gratify the high, 
expectations of his negro party. He for a while attempted to make a false impression 
on the people, by reading both his own and my publications falsely — to make even a 
literal variance between what he had published and what I had ascribed to him; but he 
soon found that his trick would fail him, and then, instead of proving that one word ] had 
said or uttered was not strictly true, as to what he had both written and said — indeed, , 
without attempting, (except in a single instance, by false reading) as I before stated, to 
prove that I had said any thing against him not strictly true; without alleging that I 
had said any thing of him personally offensive, or had in the slightest manner, alluded 
to his private affairs or character, the gentleman proceeded, with foul mouthed epithets, 
to assail not only my public and professional life, but my private life and conduct, even 
to my relations with my. wife and children. A course of debate so uncalled for, and 
conduct so brutal on the part of the reverend missionary from heaven, not only demand- 
ed at my hands the appropriate chastisement, but received it. It was, I think, pretty 
generally believed that the gentleman, having fared badly, would scarcely make another 
effort before the freemen of the county of Fayette. In this conjecture, my friends were 
right; but the columns of the Intelligencer and Journal have opened to him avenues to 
vent his malice and falsehoods, of which he has availed himself, and by which he hopes 
if he cannot deceive all, to mislead somej .as to the real issue between us; and by draw- 
ing public attention to the certificates of old women, old doctors, and his partisan keepers, 
to elude the fate which truth and justice demand for him. More of this artifice 
hereafter. 

In the gentleman's famous, or infamous speech of October, 1840, at the court house, 
he stated, in substance, first, that I was a poltroon, and would not have dared to say and 
publish of him, what I did, if I had not known that his hands were tied by his conscience 
and religion. Second, that I was a champerner, and guilty of taking by law, from the 
occupant, his home and fireside. Third, that I was dishonest in my private dealing,., 
because J had pleaded the statute of limitation, to a suit brought against me in the Fay- 
ette Circuit Court, by a manufacturer, for clothing fnrnished me for my negroes. Fourth; . 
that I had meanly refused to pay turnpike gate fees, and had sued the company because 
they would not allow me a privilege not allowed to the other citizens of the county, off 
passing, with my negroes, stock, &c, free of charge. Fifth, that I, myself, was both; 
an abolitionist and an amalgam ationist, and had not only set slaves free, but authorised 
my wife to set them free. Sixth, that in defending Moses, the slave of Joseph Rogers, 
I had attempted to ruin the character of an injured orphan, and behaved so outrageously 
that the people were about to mob me. And seventh, that I had, from the death of his- 



6 



fether, been the retained counsel of hia administrators, until his brother Cabell had be- 
come Trustee for the estate, and that 1 was then retained by him, and afterwards, when 
the reverend gentleman obtained the Trusteeship, that I was his retained counsel until 
the year 1830, when, for an abuse of trust in me, he felt it his duty to come to an open 
rupture with me. 

I will now briefly notice each of those charges in detail, giving an account of my 
former reply to each, and some reference to the gentleman's last efforts in rslation to each 
and all of them, first calling the attention of the reader to the nature of this vile cata- 
logue, and ask if the history of discussion exhibits its parallel 1 

I had stated that the gentleman had written certain numbers against domestic slavery; 
I had said he made divers speeches against domestic slavery; I had spoken of the nature 
and import of his written numbers; I had said that the late John Green and others as 
well as the gentleman, had attacked me for my pro-slavery opinions; and that on an issue 
taken between myself and the gentleman, in 1830, the verdict of my county was with 
me. He comes, as he declares, to vindicate himself, not from private calumnies, but 
•against the construction placed by me on his writings and public speeches; but, instead 
-of confining himself to disproving what I said, he brands me with cowardice, and not 
only brings before the world our private relations, but becomes my accuser, and stands 
sponsor for divers allegations of offences which I have enumerated. 

To the first charge, that of cowardice, and the boast of what he would do with me 
if his hands were not tied, being a parson, I remarked, by way of reply, that I had 
never boasted of my courage, but had always by being prudent, used enough of it to 
defend me from insult from a gentleman, and enough not to deny redress, when called 
on for it; but that the gentleman ought not to boast of what he had been at the pistol; 
first, because it ill become his cloth, as a missionary from heaven, to talk of his former 
dexterity in committing fashionable murders; secondly, because the courage of which the 
gentleman boasted never existed; that the gentleman when not a clergyman, proved him- 
self to be as successful in skulking out of a fight as in strutting into a quarrel; that he 
had, in the presence of ladies, insulted Dr. Flournoy, a youth of equal standing with 
himself, both as to person and family, for which the Doctor, according to the laws of hon- 
i or, demanded satisfaction, which the fiery parson thought prudent to decline; that a refusal 
was not what the Doctor intended to take, but after posting the chevalier a coward, all 
over the metropolis, took the street in search of the parson's corporation; that the pug- 
nacious missionary from heaven, thinking prudence the better part of valor, shut close 
the doors, and tied himself fast to the apron strings of the lady before whom he had 
given the insult; that the Doctor's posting of the gentleman gave me the first information 
that he had a long £J in his name, which I presumed the gentleman had assumed in ad- 
dition to the name his father had given him; expressing, at the same time, my indigna- 
tion at the infamous conduct of the gentleman in referring to the fate of my eldest son, 
and, when a preacher of the gospel, to charge me with cowardice, and boast of his for- 
mer prowess and terror to cowards. Here the reader will see that whatever was 
personal in what I said, was in answer to an unfeeling effort on the part of the preacher 
to wring my heart by reference to the death of my son, who had fallen in a duel, and an an- 
swer to his fiendish grin and boast that I dare not say what I had said, but for his hands be- 
ing tied. I agree that Mr. Breckinridge's being a coward was no business of mine, and that 
for me to have referred to it at my time of life, without provocation, ought to have in- 
famized me; but when Mr. Breckinridge branded me with cowardice, I had a right, in 
self defence, to say, that is untrue, and you are a coward. So, when he boasted of what 
he once was, and how 1 would then have cowered before his prowess, as matter of 
defence, I had a right to say, you vile braggart, when you gave an insult, you yourself 
cowered before your equal, and when pushed by him, you, ran like a man rather than 
be whipped like a dog: But Mr. Brekinridge says I am a slanderer of him, after admit- 
ing that he refused to fight, and not denying that the Doctor housed him and posted him. 



7 

He says that he did write an apology to the Doctor, which the Doctor would not accept, 
but insisted on a fight, and that, he still refusing, the Doctor then posted him a coward; 
but that this at last stirred up the war like parson to the sticking point; that he put on 
sword and buckler, and armed himself with poniard and pistol, that Col. Thornton (Harry 
Thornton, I suppose,) acting as his friend, assisted in arraying him for blood. But, oh! 
mishap, just as the parson was about to meet the furious Doctor, and bring on the tug of 
war, one Master McKinney issues a summons for brothers Breckinridge and Flournoy to 
appear before the Lodge; the effusion of blood is stopped; the warrior, Breckinridge, 
sheds his arms; the Lodge decides that brother Flournoy ought to take brother Breckin- 
ridge's apology, and there the bloody affair ended ! This is Mr. Breckinridge's own 
version of the affair, by which he says he marks me a gross liar and slanderer. Indeed, 
parson, is it true, as you say, that after the long <5J was posted in Frankfort, from the 
capitol to the bar room, after you were holed in your house, that you held converse with 
your enfuriated antagonist, referred the matter with him to the Lodge, and had your 
humble apology decided sufficient? Sir, is this your chivalry 1 ? I only said you thought 
prudence the better part of valor, and that he that was in battle slain, could never fight 
again, but that he that run away might live to fight another day. If you could not 
fight, you did right to run, but I would have run my legs off sooner than to refer my 
apology to the Lodge, with the long <$J hanging out at every corner of the metropolis. 
Not to fight, is Christian, and I admit the propriety of your lecture, where you ask me 
if it were not better for you not to have killed the foolish Doctor. I never blamed you 
for not fighting; I never in my life spoke of your running, until you boasted of your 
prowess. The crime consisted in a parson's disgracing himself and his church, in 
playing the braggart — in a coward's attempting to disgrace me, by alledging my want 
of courage. Where there has been any hanging in a family, there should be no men- 
tion of ropes. Where a fellow has been pilloried and whipped for stealing himself, he 
should not boast of his honesty and charge dishonesty upon others. A fellow disgraced 
and posted for cowardice, has no right to strut at old age, and say you coward; and, if 
he does so strut, the injured and insulted has a right to say, it ill becomes you, you das- 
tard, to boast of your exploits with the pistol, after strutting into a quarrel, slinking out 
of the fight, and running and hiding yourself like the timid hare, until you were posted 
and advertised as a stray from all the pales of honor. 

But the gentleman in his last effort, charges me with falsehood, in saying, that his 
father only named him Robert, and gets his mama to certify that he was verily christen- 
ed Robert Jefferson, at the special request of Mr. Jefferson himself. Here I beg the 
gentleman's pardon, I never said his father did not call him Robert Jefferson. I only 
stated, that the first time I ever knew he had the long to his name, was when I saw 
it in Doctor Flournoy's advertisement, posting him as a coward, and in that I was 
sincere. I beg the reader to see the declaration I drew with his brother Cabell at my, 
elbow, against his aunt Meredith. I there call him just plain Robert; it may be true, 
that he really was christened with a long <3J to his name, and that the old lady mother, at 
Cabell's Dale, on Elkhorn, in 1800, heard Mr. Jefferson specially request that he should 
have the long all the way from Carter's mountain in Virginia. It may be all true 
that Letitia Preston, a Presbyterian, stood sponsor for the long <3J to an Episcopalian 
clergyman. But if ever I meet my relation and old friend Mrs. Floyd on this side the- 
grave, I shall not fail to tell her what a hopeful God son she has, and how much she has 
failed in her promise that he should keep his tongue from evil speaking, lying and slan- 
dering, until she presented him to the Bishop for confirmation. 

The next unprovoked assault the gentleman made upon me, was that I was a pro- 
fessional champerner and maintainer of suits, and had by such guileful and covenous 
means deprived the occupant of his home and fireside. Here was a direct imputation 
on mc as a lawyer and citizen, of a matter totally irrelevant to any thing I had said of 
his negro transactions, negro speeches, or his negro books. Well, how did I reply! 



8 

Not by bringing up his conduct or character disconnected with his charge against me; \ 
retorted in substance by saying, it ill becomes you, sir, to alledge against me as a crime, 
that I have carried on suits for parts of the land, in contest, when your father was a 
champerner of the very kind for which you attempt to make me odious; for report, nay, 
history is, that he was the author of the Act of the Kentucky Legislature that made 
champerty and maintaince lawful; aDd under that Act, laid the foundation of that for- 
tune he left you at his death. That the first — the very first time I ever was concerned with 
champerty suits, was as successor to your father, in which I closed his business; and you 
and the rest of his family inherited, and now have the proceeds of his champerty through 
my labors. True, that although I had often defended the occupant successfully, in a 
practice of more than forty years it had often happened that I was counsel for the suc- 
cessful claimant under our land laws, and sometimes interested with him; in this I 
violated no law, but it frequently happened that I had felt deeply for the evicted 
occupant ; and never had my heart been more wrung than in the ejection of the 
gentleman's aunt, old Mrs. Meredith — his father's beloved and only sister; that Mrs. 
Meredith was married badly, her husband being dissipated and improvident, to such 
an extent, that as she informed me, he was about to sell out his land on Elkhorn, and 
tear his wife from her brotber, and settle her in the then wilds of Green River. To 
prevent which, Mr. J. Breckinridge, the gentleman's father, raised up a nominal claim 
against Samuel Meredith as security to his own father, Col. Samuel Meredith, of Vir- 
ginia, on which he first obtained his bond as security to his father for three hundred and 
fifty-five acres of land on the north side of Elkhorn, and then by the aid of his sister, 
Mrs. Meredith, for her exclusive benefit, prevailed on S. Meredith to make to him a 
mortgage for 355 acres of land lying between the houses of Breckinridge and Meredith* 
with the sole object of securing to Mrs. Meredith a home. That after his death the mort- 
gage was found, and his heirs, (the Rev. gentleman being one) got me to bring suit for the 
property. That I recovered judgment for them, and that the reverend gentleman want- 
ed me to bring suit for the mesne profits; but this I refused to do, being satisfied that the 
claim to the land on the part of Mr. Breckinridge's heirs was unjust, not only from com- 
petent evidence, but from the statements of Mrs. Meredith, a woman of character and 
veracity, who often detailed to me the circumstances with tears in her eyes; and that 
while old Mrs. Meredith slept with her brother in death, the gentleman having acquired 
the 355 acres at a price merely nominal, of the other heirs, now struts lord proprietor 
of Mrs. Meredith's land and labor; that this land thus plundered from his aunt is the 
place and land he boasted he had come to visit. On this retort, the gentleman in page 
13 of his last libel, discourses as follows: 

"These are bitter things; and whether they have any relevancy to prove that I was the 
author of the act of 1833, or not, if they were true, 1 should confess myself , that de- 
testable wretch, which, every upright man must pronounce him to be, who could bring 
them, knowing them to be false. 1 frankly take issue with you then, upon this case as 
put by you. If what you say, be true, I confess myself infamous; if it is false I hold 
you to be everlastingly disgraced." 

Now, gentle reader, can you not perceive that this fellow is, under conscious guilt, 
playing the braggart. After staking his infamy on the one side> against my everlasting 
disgrace on the other side, he exclaims: 

" I produce then at once the highest of all proof, in the most undoubted of all 
forms. Hear it— and if you are not dead to all honor, hide yourself forever from 
the haunts of men." 

And what is this high proof? Why, it is Harry I. Bodley's certificate, that on the 
30th of June, 1814, as an Attorney at Law, I brought an action of ejectment for John 
Breckinridge's heirs, (the gentleman being one, omitting the long J,) and that I obtain- 
ed judgment for them at the March term, 1817, for 355 acres of land, on the waters of 
Elkhorn, and that the lessors of the plaintiffs, (the gentleman being one) issued a writ of 



9 



possession, and on the 1st of March, 1821, turned Samuel Meredith out of possession 
of 355 acres of land. That on the 20th of November, 1821, the lessors of the plain- 
tiffs, the reverend messenger from heaven still being one, in his veritable name of Rob- 
ert J. Breckinridge, by Richard II. Chinn, brought an action of trespass, for the rents 
and profits of the ten farms recovered, and for waste, &c. committed on them. 

Now, is not this the highest of all proof — precisely what I stated in my speech! 
Does it not prove that I brought the suit, and obtained the judgement for the gentleman; 
and that he tunred Meredith out of possession just as I said; and that after I obtained the 
judgment, that I would proceed no farther; and that the gentleman employed Mr. Chinn, 
sued for the mesne proffits, wastes, &c. &c, and as I said, paid the costs'? Yet upon 
this certificate, conforming substantially, if not literally with my statement, has this 
brazen slanderer presumed to denounce me for wilful falsehood, and as unworthy the so- 
ciety of men. But reader, I pray your patience while I bring this reverend prop of the 
church still farther in your view. On page 13, he proceeds to say: 

"So that in point of fact, neither my aunt nor myself had any thing to do with 
this matter." 

My countrymen, you can but see that this individual is trying not only to convict me 
of mistatements; but to throw the whole odium of the plundering of his aunt upon the 
other .heirs, especially upon his deceased brother Cabell. That he not only pleads his 
infancy- — but utterly denies, that he ever had any thing to do with the matter. Now, 
before I convict this reckless being under his own hand, of positive falsehood, I beg leave 
to state a few facts known to all, who recollect Cabell Breckinridge, which will go far to 
relieve him of the odium his hopeful brother is attempting to heap upon him. From 
the time Cabell Breckinridge undertook the agency, until he left the county, he trans- 
acted but little of his father's business. And after he left the county, I do not believe he 
ever meddled with it, except in a limited degree. 

Dates become important.— In August, 1820, Gen. Adair was elected Governor 
of Kentcky, and appointed Cabell Breckinridge his Secretary. In the month of Sep- 
tember, Cabell Breckinridge took upon himself the duties of Secretary of State, 
removed to the seat of Government, and never, so far as I know or believe, interfered 
with the Meredith contest again, until the day of his death, which happened in the 
summer of 1823. From the time that Cabell Breckinridge removed to Frankfort, until 
I washed my hands of the whole business of the Breckinridge family, no human being 
except the reverend gentleman, ever visited me, or consulted me as the representative of 
the rest of the heirs. He has stated that I said, of him I knew nothing; this is a trick 
of the gentleman. When speaking pf him, I did say, that until the gentleman returned 
from college, of my own knowledge, I knew nothing; but I added that what I had heard 
from others was unfavorable. This is true — and this he took care to omit. 

After his brother left here, he was, as far as I know, the sole agent and manager of 
the suits here. The gentleman says he had no power to act. What a falsehood! Who 
or what controlled him ? He was an heir, and of full age and to spare, when he brought 
the suit against his aunt for mesne profits. He was not, nor could he be affected by the 
very limited power Cabell Breckinridge had under the acts of assembly. It is also 
due to the memory of Cabell Breckinridge, for me to say, that I have no reason to be- 
lieve, that at the time he ordered suit, and obtained the judgment for his father's heirs, 
that he was at all acquainted with the special trust t between his father and aunt 
not so with the reverend gentleman, when he took up the business; for from 1821 to the 
day he finally effected the ouster of his aunt in 1826, he knew every thing about the 
claim and its incidents. And now reader, recollect that the reverend gentleman has 
declared, that if what I have said of his aunt's statements, are true; that he 
is infamous. He has even declared, that the descendants of his aunt disavowed my 
statements, as coming from her; that so far from his having any hand in taking from hie 



2 



10 



annt the S55 acres of land, he was the peace maker between her and his father 3 ! family \ 
and on her death bed, received from her a pledge of her undying confidence and affec- 
tion. Stand to your word, my reverend good sir, and my word for it, you shall be as 
infamous as you ought to be. 

Reader, here follows the Bill, the whole Bill in Chancery, filed by Mrs. Meredith. 
The original is in the hand writing of the late Wm. T. Barry, well known to you and 
to the American people. My countrymen read it — and read it you guilty wretch, 
Robert Jefferson Breckinridge! 

To the Honorable, the Judge of the Fayette Circuit Court, in Chancery silting: 

Your orator and oratrix, Samnel Meredith and Eliza T. M., his wife, respectfully shftweth, 

That about the day of they removed from the State of Virginia, and settled on the 

tract of land where they now reside, in the immediate neighborhood of the late John Breckinridge, 
dec'd.upon a Military claim of the late Colonel Samuel Meredith, the father of your orator. That 
on the 8th day of March, 1790, said Tol. Meredith sold and conveyed six hundred acres of land out of 
the above tract of 2000, all on the North side of Elkhorn, to the said John Breckinridge, as will ap- 

£ear from the deed hereby referred to. That about the day of the said Col. Meredith, 
is said tract of land to his son Samuel, your orator gave. That about the 6th of March, 1790, upon the 
supposition that there was a deficiency in the six hundred acres of land conveyed as abov« to John 
Breckinridge, the said Col. Meredith gave his bond, with your orator as security to make good the 
deficiency if any, as will appear by referring to said bond, a copy of which is heiewith filed as part 
of this bill. Tha't subsequently thereto, under a misapprehension, your orator sold part of the land 

conveyed as aforesaid to John Breckinridge, viz: The 600 acres, to a certain who soFd 

to Clarke. That your orator contracted to sell said and he afterward to Clarke, the 

quantity of 221 acres, but it was found at a subsequent day, viz: in August, 1797, that the boundaries 

only contained about acres, and the said Clarke sued your orator for the deficiency which suit 

was afterwards referred, and by the award of arbitrators, your orator was compelled to paj for said 

deficiency at the rate of per acre as will appear by referring to a copy of said award herewith 

filed, as a part of this bill. That shortly after it was discovered by the said John Breckinridge, that 
your orator had sold as above, port of his 600 acres, he was displeased about it; and said Breckin- 
ridge wrote a letter to Col. Meredith on the subject, stating amongst other things, that your orator 
had improperly sold the better part of said 600 acres, and that the purchaser, Clarke, threatened to 
sue your orator, and that it he did he would certainly recover the full value of the lands with its im- 
provements which would certainly ruin your orator; said Breckinridge declaring that he would not 
yield the title on his part, no matter what the consequences might be, to your orator, unless he, Col. 
Meredith, would indemnify said John Breekinridge, proposing the mode of effecting the indemnity, 
and suggesting the names of credible persons to ascertain the amount of remuneration that said John 
Breckinridge was entitled to, for the land sold to Clarke as aforesaid. The complainants charge, 
that this indemnity was given, and that, at a future day, the said John Breckinridge was satisfied and 
paid by the said Col. Meredith, foi the land sold to Clarke. The complainants, for greater certainty, 
refer to a copy of said letter, dated 17th July, 1791, hereto annexed as part of this bill. The com* 
plainants, as an evidence that satisfaction was given to said Breckinridge, and that he was fully in- 
demnified for the land sold Clarke aforefaid, would state; That said John Breckinridge did after- 
wards, viz: on the day of , acquiesce in the sale to Clarke, and confirmed the same; and 

that after the date of said letter, the said John Breckinridge acted as the agent and attorney in fact 
of said Col. Meredith in the sale of landsof his in Kentucky; and that large sums of money, the pro- 
ceeds of sales, passed through the hands of said Breckinridge to said Col. Meredith. The complain- 
ants also state that said Meredith was at that time and continued till his death, to be a man of ample 
fortune and with abundant means for the payment of all demands against him. That on the other 
hand, your orator from the imprudence and indiscretion, too often incident to the sons of wealthy 
and indulgent parents, had involved himself and was at that time laboring under debts contracted be- 
fore his marriage, and to settle which, he was ultimately compelled to make great sacrifice of proper- 
ty, as will appear from the letter ot John Breckinridge to Col. Meredith. That the embarrassed 
situation of your orator, his previous youthful indiscretion and apprehended future imprudence was 
the source of great and continued uneasiness to his family and friends. That that uneasiness was 
stronglv felt by the said John Breckinridge, and often expressed by ftirn. That between your ora- 
trix and her said brother John, there was uncommon affection; the natural impulses of affection were 
heightened and fraternal anxiety endeared on the part of her said brother on account of her being 
an only sister, and thus peculiarly circumstanced; remote from her other friends, not even capable 
of affording aid incase of necessity. That she had the utmost confidence in her said brother, and so 
had your orator. 

_ Your oratrix looked on him in the character of a most affectionate brother, a benevolent and en- 
lightened friend, whose heart prompted him to act for her, and whose understanding could devise 
sure places for her safety. That added to all this, her brother was, of all men, the most exact and 

E articular in his transactions, and remarkable for making written memorandums of what concerned 
is own estate, and that of his friends entrusted to his care. That the friendship between your oratrix 
and her said brother, continued with increased affection until the day of his death, your oratrix being 
Biuch with him during his last illness, which was a protracted one. 

The complainants would further state, that about the day of , your orator being, from 

some cause, dissatisfied, resolved to move to the Green River country, and preparatory for it, adver- 



11 



lised his land for sale. This was the cause of much inquietude and unhappiness in the family, and 
with their friends, it awakened in a particular manner, the apprehensions and tears of your oratrix's 
mother, and her said brother John Breckinridge. How to prevent his removal, or in caie he persisted 
in that course — how to secure and procure a home for your oratrix, was the subject of anxious 
solicitude. That frequent conversations took place of a confidential nature between your oratrix, 
her mother and brother John ; to the latter, your oratrix looked for friendly care, and submitted all 
to his prudence and judicious management. It was then suggested that the deficiency of land, in the 
600 acres sold her said brother by Col. Meredith, and the portion that had been improperly sold to 
Clarke, by the husband of your oratrix aforesaid, and the circumstance of her brother's holding a 
bond as above stated on Col. Meredith, with the said husband as security, might with propriety and 
probably success, be made the grounds of a satisfactory arrangement; although it was then understood, 
that said John Breckinridge, if not then satisfied, was to look for ultimate iesponsibility to Colonel 
Meredith, and that the sole object of the arrangement was to secure a home lor your oratrix, and to 
guard it, as her trustee, against the future imprudence of her said husband. Accordingly with this 
understanding, and by the procurement of your oratrix, a letter was addressed to her said husband, 
by her brother, dated the 1st of August, 1796, as will fully and at large appear by a copy of said 
letter hereto annexed as part of this bill. 

The complainants state, that the conference invited by this letter led to an arrangement, in conse- 
quence of which, a bond was execnted on the 9th day of September, 1797, for the conveyance of 355 
acres, upon the conditions therein mentioned, and a conditional deed of mortgage was also txecutcd 
by your orator for aforesaid 355 acres of land, as will appear by said bond and deed, attested copies of 
which are hereto annexed as part of this bill. That in the treaty between her said husband and bro- 
ther, it was the object of her said brother, to have got for your oratrix 355 acres of land, including' 
the mansion house; and exertions were made to that end, but her said husband would not agree to it. 

Your orator has every reason to believe, and the complainants expressly charge: That said John 
Breckinridge did, at the date of said mortgage, make a memorandum in writing, signed with his 
own hand, expressing fully and particularly the nature of this transaction, by which memorandum 
it was distinctly alledged, that the above land was held in trust by him, for the use of your oratrix 
and her heirs, which was kept among his papers, and all signed to secure the right of your oratrix 

and her heirs, in case any accident should happen to said John . The said coniplainanU 

have reason to betieve, that the said writing not being found by the executors of the afoiesaid John, 
has been lost or mislaid, and that the same cannot now be had. Your oratrix says, thai in talking 1 
on this subject, her said brother John frequently told her not to be uneasy about the land, that it wag 
secured to her and her heirs, and that no one could deprive them of it. That the said brother John, 
gave similar assurances to others, and particularly to their brothers James and Robert ; and that in 
consequence of her brother's kindness in this particular, and others towards your oratrix, her bro- 
ther James made provision for their brother William, in Virginia, who was unfortunate and required 
aid. The complainants, and your oratrix, in particular, state that this arrangement was not designed 
to defraud creditors, as her said husoand had ample means besides the said 355 acres of land,.. That 
it was not calculated or designed to injure her said husband, as the land was to be secured to your 
oratrix and their children. 

It was intended as a prudential arrangement to save so much of your orator's land, for the use of 
his family, against the damages of his future indiscretion and imprudence. Also it was intended to 
provide a home for your oratrix, near to her said brother and trustee, and to prevent your orator from 
selling his land and moving away as he contemplated . That owing much to this arrangement, your 
orator declined removing, and has continued to reside on his said tract of land ever since, enjoying 
together with the other part of the tract, the said 355 acres,, without hinderance or molestation of 
said John Breckinridge, or any other person whatsoever, receiving the rents and issues of said 355 
acres of land, and having made lasting and valuable improvements on the same. That the said John 
Breckinridge resided on a tract adjoining a tract of your orator, until the time of his death, which 

happened on the day of . That he never in his lifetime, set up any claim to said land, 

except as the trustee and friend of your oratrix. That the said John frequently acted as the agent 
for the complainants in relation to said land, and especially in the year 1800, when the complainants 
were in Virginia, the said John, as agent for your orator, Samuel, rented out part of said 355acres, 

by written lease, to a certain , as will more fully appear from said lease, hereby referred 

to, as part of this bill. The complainants continued to enjoy the said land with its rents "and issues 

peaceably, until about the day of , when the heirs of said John Breckinridge, dee'd. (who 

are prayed to be made defendants hereto,) viz: Joseph C. Breckinridge, John, Robert, William and 
James Breckinridge, David Castleman, and Mary Ann his wife, instituted an action of ejectment a- 
gainst your orator Samuel, for said land, and having the legal title as aforesaid — obtained i judgment 
at law for the land — and will proceed to sue out a writ of possession and oust the complainants, and 
take possession of said land, unless restrained by injunction from this Court, all of which is contrary 
to equity and good conscience. In tender consideration whereof, &c. and for as &c. to the end that 
said defendants may, upon their corporal oaths, full, true and perfect answers, make to all and singu- 
lar the allegations of this bill, as if herein again repeated byway «f interrogatory. That the premi- 
ses considered your honor will grant an injunction to maintain your oiatrix in the possession of said 
land, and to prevent the said heirs of John Breckinridge, dee'd. from entering on or taking posses- 
sion of the laud until the further order of this court. That on a final hearing, your honor will 
decree an execution of said trust, by the said heir3 of John Breckinridge agreeable to the contract of 
their said ancestor, and such other and further relief as the nature of this case requires, and 
as may be compatible with equity. And as in duty bound, your orator and oratrix will ever 
pray,&e. 



12 



Fayette County— Sct: 

Sworn to before nie, by the above named ELIZABETH MEREDITH, agreeable to law, this 
18th day of February, 1821. Given under my hand. 

3 JOHN BRADFORD, J. P. F. C. 

Kentucky, Fayette Circuit Court— Set: 

The within and foregoing Bill in Chancery (of Samuel Meredith and wife vs. John Breckinridge's 
heirs.) is truly copied from the original on file in my office. 

HARRY I. BODLEY, Clerk, 

By Jo. R. Megowan, D. C. 

In this bill, Mrs. Meredith states, in substance, that the Mortgage was procured by 
her brother with her influence over her husband, for her use, and under the most sol- 
emn assurances of her brother, that the land should be forever her own, as a home for 
herself and her children — that her brother was only to exercise a right of trusteeship. 
The bill further charges that Col. Meredith had fully paid John Breckinridge every 
farthing he owed him on the bond to which Samuel Meredith was security, which was 
made the pretext for the mortgage. It also charges that John Breckinridge afterwards 
acted as agent for Col. Meredith, and that large sums passed through his hands as such 
agent. The bill further charges, that John Breckinridge, before his death, according 
to his promises to his sister, made, and left among his papers, a paper written and sign- 
ed by him, shewing the intent with which he took the mortgage, and his sister's right 
to the land. It alledges many other important facts, all tending to prove, incontestibly, 
that John Breckinridge never thought of depriving his sister of her property, and that 
the reader may have a full and better view than I could give by extracts, I have inserted 
it at length. To this bill, Mrs. Meredith, not Samuel Meredith, annexes her solemn 
oath. The gentleman has admitted that his aunt was a woman of exemplary piety 
and strict veracity. Here is, therefore, the oath of a pious Christian, an aged matron 
of spotless purity of character, of admitted intelligence and veracity, in which the 
deponent, of her own knowledge, as actor and party in what she swears to, swears to 
every allegation in the bill. Now, gentle reader, is not the gentleman driven to ad- 
mit, that if his aunt is to be believed when on oath, that he has availed himself of his 
father's death, and that of Col. Meredith also, to strip that, aunt of a home provided 
for her by his father? Must he not admit — if not, is he not compelled, on his own ad- 
missions of her veracity, to admit his own vileness, in taking advantage of his aunt, 
and, without one cent paid her or her children, possessing himself of her land and labor? 
That he has wronged, cheated and defrauded Mrs. Meredith, is most certain, unless 
she, instead of being what she was and what he has admitted she was, a pure and 
spotless Christian, lived with perjury on her tongue, and died with perjury on her soul. 
But is the solemn oath of this pious parson's aunt, and the tacts that sustain her, (from 
the whole conduct of his father, from 1790, when Samuel Meredith, the elder, first 
gave John Breckinridge his bond, with his son as security, to indemnify him for the 
loss on the contract for the 600 acres of land,) not enough'? Let us then hear his own 
father, speaking from the grave. Mr. Breckinridge writes to Samuel Meredith, as 
folio weth: 

So long as you continue to hold your land, I shall contrive to look to your father, and not to 
disturb you; but if you are determined to sell, I am determined to do myself justice. . 1 shall, unless 
you discontinue your advertissment, send an advertisement to Stewart to insert under yours, denying 
your power to sell, until my land is laid oft' agreeable to your bond. 

In a matter of such consequence, I think it necessary to speak plainly to you. I consider the 
happiness of my sister, (which is very dear to me,) to be deeply involved in this project. Moreover, 
I am now about to take a journey ia a few hours, &c. * * * to be absent some time. 

I conjure you to reconsider this measure. You have a very promising rising family. You are in 
as fair a way a? airy man, to be soon handsomely and genteely situated . You have a seat inferior to 
none in the State. You are in a genteel and agreeable neighborhood; and in a situation to educate 
your yamiiy as well as you could wish. Your wife is among all her relations and acquaintances, and 
happy where she is; and what are you about to exchange all this for? A country you have never seen 
— a country when you do see, vou will see filled with nothing but hunters, horse thieves and savages, 
and a country where wretchedness, poverty and sickness will always reign. If you consider my ad- 



13 



vice worth value? I request you to take it in this instsnce. If time should prove to you it 
was bad advice, 1 will agree never to obtrude another upon you. Yours, &c. 

August 9th, 1796. J. BRECKINRIDGE. 

Kentucky, Fayette Circuit Court — Set: 

The foregoing is a true extract from an original letter of J. Breckinridge, to Samuei Meredith, 
on file in my office, in the chancery suit of said Samuel Meredith vs. J. Breckinridge's heirs 

HARRY I. BODLEY, Clerk, 

By Jo. R. Megowan, D. C. 

Will this still not do! Then let us hear what the pious parson's illustrious uncle 
speaks to him from the tombs of the dead. We will present again to his eye, and now 
for the first time to the eye of the reader, the deposition of Gen. James Breckinridge, 
of Virginia, as followeth: 

The deposition of James Breckinridge, of Botetout county, and State of Virginia, taken at his 
house by the consent of parties, as appears by the annexed agreement, to be rend as evidence in a 
suit depending and undetermined in the Fayette Circuit Court, for the State of Kentucky, wherein 
Samuel Meredith is complainant, and the heirs and representatives of John Breckinridge, dee'd. and 
others the defendants. The said deponent being of lawful age, and sworn, deposeth and saith in an- 
swer to interrogatories put to him, by the counsel of the complainants, that the said John Breckin- 
ridge (who was the deponent's brother,) did often relate to this deponent in his lifetime, his fears 
that the complainants imprudence would bring his family to poverty, to prevent which, he has made 
some unavailing efforts to reserve some portion of his estate for their use, by having it placed out of 
his control. 

Iu the winter of 1796, and the succeeding spring, he spent some time with this deponent in the 
city of Richmond, and at the deponents house, when the subject was mentioned. He then stated, 
as well as deponent recollects, (it may have been at some anterior period, but this deponent speaks 
with confidence as to the import of the consideration) that Col Meredith, the father of the complain- 
ants, was bound to him lor a deficiency of land, which he had sold to him out of his military tract 
lying on Elkhorn, in Kentucky, for which the complainant had also made himself liable; that as he 
found he could not obtain indemnification from Col. Meredith without litigation, and as well as he 
remembers, subjecting the complainant to the suit of his father, for remuneration in the want of a 
necessary agent herein, which he threatened to deduct an equivalent amount from the portion of his 
estate, which he meant to give him; he, the said John Bieckinridge, said he would endeavor to use 
the claim, as a means of recovering as much of the tract of land, on which the complainants lived, as 
would save a home for his sister (the wife of the complainant) and family. 

In the fall of the year 1799, this deponent made a visit to his friends in Kentucky, when he spent 
some time with his said brother. Then also, the same subject was mentioned, and he told this depo- 
nent that he had at length succeeded with the aid of his sister, the wife of the complainant, in secur- 
ing part of the tract of land, on which the complainants lived ; that his first attempt was to incumber 
that parton which they lived, but the complainant not consenting to incumber that part of the tract, 
he had taken incumbrance on as much as he would incumber; and that all hough it was but a part 
of the tract, and that too, not the most valuable, yet it might have the effect of preventing the com- 
plainant from selling the residue, especially as he had said he had assured the complainants, that his 
object was to secure a home for his family, and that as long as he continued to hold the tract, he the 
said John, would not distrust him, but look to his father, and that, at all events, it had the effect for 
the present, of breaking up his project of selling and removing to Green River. This deponent 
being thereto interrogated, says that he feels confident, that if the said John Breckinridge had not 
have been influenced by the aforesaid views in the transaction aforesaid, he would not have taken 
the incumbrance. Independent of his declarations made to this deponent, his love for his sister and 
her family, and his anxiety to secure a living for them, would have forbid his taking from them what 
Col. Meredith was bound for and amply able to pay. The deponent being thereto interrogated, fur- 
the says, that he does not recollect that be ever heard his said brother say, that he meant to give the 
aforesaid incumbered property to his sister, for the use of herself and children absolutely, but from 
the spirit and turn of the various conversations upon that subject, that impression was certainly 
made upon the mind of this deponent, and he does believe, that if he had made a will.it would have 
contained a provision for that purpose. The land had cost him £60 per hnndred acres. The defi- 
ciency as this deponent understood, was about 300 acres; he could therefore only receive the pur- 
chase money for that quantity and interest from Col. Meredith, and the land which he took an 
incumbrance on from the complainants, sometime between the years 1796 and 1799, was worth in the 
latter year, as this deponent was told, about £5 or £6 per acre. This deponent's knowledge of the 
heart and principles of his brother, utterly forbids the belief, that he would have used his influence 
and that of his sister, to induce the complainant to do an act so ruinous to him under the mask of 
friendship. This .deponent would also further add, by way of elucidating the views of his brother 
in the aforesaid transaction, that about the aforesaid period, there was another branch of the family 
equally dear to him, and this deponent who resided in the State of Virginia, and required their aid 
more if possible, than the complainants required the care and vigilance of this deponents brother. 
In the various conversations which occurred between him and this deponent on these subjects it was 
fully understood between them, that if he would, as was expected "keep matters straight in Kentucky, 
I would do 1 the same here," and in execution af this contract, this deponent made advances to a 
greater amount than the value of the aforesaid land rated, as the purchase money and interest up to 



14 



theyoar 1799, u hen his said brother told him of the footing on which he had placed his claim against 
Col. Meredith. These advances this deponent don't expect to be replaced. The)' were not made 
with that view, but with the same view that this deponent supposed actuated his brother in the above 
mentioned and other transactions. This deponent begs to be pardoned for making a slight digres- 
sion for the sake of doing what he conceives to be an act of justice, to the representatives of his 
deceased brother. He hopes that what he said, may not be interpreted into the slightest reproval of 
them, for having asserted their claim to the above mentioned property. They found the evidences of 
the claim amongst his papers, and doubtless knowing nothing of the motives and circumstances which 
gave rise to it, even blameless at least, if some of them were not legally bound to take measures for 
its recovery. This deponent, not being further interrogated, saith not, &c. [This deposition con- 
sists of 6 pages.] 

^ JAMES BRECKINRIDGE. 

Virginia, Botetout County- to-wit: 

This day personally appeared before us, Justices of the Peaee, in and for the county aforesaid, 
James Breckinridge, and made oath that the above deposition, written wholly by himself, contains 
the truth to the best of his knowledge and beliel. Given under our hands this 22d day of December, 
1817. MATTHEW HARVEY. 

JOHN MOORE. 

Fayette Circuit Court, Clerks Office: 

1 certify that this deposition is truly copied from the original on file in my office, in the old suit 
of Meredith, &c. vs. Breckinridge, &c.' 

HARRY T. BODLEY, Clerk, 

By Jo. R. Megawan, D. C. 

I am informed that Gen. Robert Breckinridge, another brother of John Breckinridge, 
gave, if possible, still stronger proof of his brother John's confessions and statements 
that the mortgage was a mere sham, and only intended for his sister's benefit; but thiy 
deposition has by some means disappeared. I will add to thia, that the bill of Mrs. 
Meredith was filed in the year 1821, and remained on the docket until 1826, not one of 
the Breckinridge family — no, not even the reverend gentleman himself, daring to venture 
an answer denying its truth, under oath. And, again, let us trace the footsteps of this 
pious preacher, in his approaches farther upon his aunt's rights and home. I will for 
that purpose lay before you a paper signed by the gentleman's own hand, Robert J. Breck- 
inridge, and his lamented, persecuted and sainted aunt, Elizabeth Meredith, in the words 
and figures following; 

It is agreed between Elizabeth H. Meredith and Robert J. Breckinridge, as follows: The said 
Meredith is to dismiss her suit in Chancery, in the Fayette Circuit Court, and to abandon her claim 
to the land ; and Robert J. Breckinridge is to dismiss the suit at law, brought by John Breckinridge's 
heirs against Samuel Meredith's heirs, for the mense profits and waste. This 14th July, 1826. 

ELIZABETH MEREDITH. 
Test, R. J. BRECKINRIDGE. 

DAN'L. Mc. PAYNE. 

A copy— Att. H. I. BODLEY, Clerk, 
By J. R. Megowan, D. C. 

By this paper, the prayerful parson, falsely pretending that he had then a suit against 
hisdestitute aunt, for mesne profits and for waste, &c, running back to the date of his 
title, in which he would overwhelm her with costs and damages, extorted from her not 
only a dismissal of her suit, but a relinquishment of all claim to the 355 acres of land. 
Here ends the tragedy of the sacking and plundering of Mrs. Meredith, by parson 
Robert Jefferson Breckinridge; and, reader, let the curtain drop, and the grave, for the 
moment, close upon the view of this persecution and robbery of a destitute, feeble and 
pious old woman, by her griping and unfeeling nephew, and hear the gentleman and 
myself settle our accounts; but bear in mind what I stated as to Mrs. Meredith's state- 
ments to me of her difficulty with her nephew, and that he, the said nephew, declared 
that if my statements were true, he ought to be infamous. I dare, now, the most zeal- 
ous of his society for the rescue of this parson from infamy — I dare any honest man 
upon earth, to say that I have not proven all I said of him in connection with the 
persecution and robbery of his aunt, and that by record, by the oath of his aunt, by the 
letter of his father, by the deposition of his illustrious uncle, and under the hand of the 



15 



miscreant himself. Guilty monster, conscious of guilt, he even denies that he had 
part or lot in divesting his aunt of her estate, and yet, under his hand, he calls the suit 
against her his suit, (that is, the suit of John Breckinridge's heirs,) and stipu- 
lates to dismiss the suit, if his aunt will dismiss her suit and release her claim. 
The reader will say, surely Mr. Breckinridge will now retract, and, in Christian char- 
ity to others, admit he has wronged Mr. Wickliffe and injured his aunt, and will restore 
the guilty prize. No, fellow citizens; this, Mr. Breckinridge will never do; his guilt is 
too black and too multiform; his heart is too corrupt, his conscience too hardly seared, 
for him to say, Lord forgive me, I return four fold; but, like Macbeth, he has waded too 
deep in crime to turn back; like that guilty monster, when staring at murdered Ban- 
quo 's ghost, he will look on this paper and say, U I did not do itP 9 Macbeth thought 
the jewels of the crown were the brighter for being steeped in blood; and the reverend 
and prayerful parson objects not to his Brsedalbane estate (as he has dubbed it,) because 
it has been steeped in and won by fraud. He struts over the grave of his aunt; he 
treads upon her labor and her very tears; he looks upon the moss that covers the 
graves of his father and his aunt, and soothes his conscience that the dead cannot bite; 
but as sure as the murdered Banquo had a God to punish guilt, Mrs. Meredith has one; 
and let him remember, that what is acquired by guilt, is but a scorpion to gnaw the 
heart of the guilty wretch; that Macbeth's crown, won by blood, passed from his guilty 
Jiead, no heir of his succeeding-; thus may Brsedalbane pass into stranger hands, no heir 
of his succeeding. It is one of the mercies of a good God, that this shall be a law of 
his providence. Scarce a villain lives, however versed in crime, that does not desire that 
his son shall be an honest man, and live free of his own guilt before God; and God, in 
mercy, always grants to guilty man that what he acquires by fraud and villainy shall 
not curse his seed. I have an only son, and I trust in God if I have any thing, at my 
death, that I have not, as a fair and honest man, acquired, that he will never let it curse 
my posterity; and, in his presence, I declare that had I acquired Brsedalbane of my aunt, 
as I have shown the gentleman has of his aunt, I would sooner follow my last son to the 
grave, than that a descent through my blood, polluted by the act, should possess him of 
one acre of it. 

I here close with Mr. Breckinridge the affair of Mrs. Meredith's land, for the present; 
and reader, if I have not nailed him to the counter as guilty of oppressing his aunt, and 
of wilful and corrupt falsehood on myself in relation to this matter, I confess that it is 
useless for me to attempt to establish my innocence and his guilt. I wish you also to 
bear in mind, that this is but one issue of many which the gentleman has dared to make 
"between him and myself- — that now, and in every instance hereafter, I pledge myself to 
convict him, by the same clear and indubitable evidence, of wilful falsehood, wherever a 
writing or record, accessible to the world, will decide what is truth and what is falsehood. 

One remark here, on the gentleman's impudence in referring to persons who will 
vouch for his falsehoods. He has referred to the children of Mrs, Meredith to contra- 
dict me, and says they have denied my statements — that he could have their statements 
to that effect, but, that the descendents of Mrs. Meredith are females, and his delicacy 
forbids his bringing them before the world. Now I pronounce this a tissue of infamous 
falsehoods. No child, as 1 believe, of Mrs. Meredith, ever contradicted a word I have 
said; and, if they had, they would have slandered their mother and sealed upon her 
the crime of perjury. The only one I have spoken to is the elder married lady, who 
informs me that Mr. Breckinridge's overseer asked her if I had ever spoken to her on 
the subject, and she told him I had not. Out of this, the delicate gentleman has man- 
ufactured his tale, a gentleman, too, scrupulous of wounding female delicacy, by bring- 
ing the statements of married females, in the prime of life, before the world, but who 
has, to cover his shame and disgrace, attempted, by a statement of his aged mother, 
tottering to the grave, to prove that I was not at her husband's burial, thirty-five years 
before she gave the certificate, which statement is not true, and which statement I will 



16 



■disprove by as respectable a witness as lives. So far from contradicting my esateinent f 
the lady I conversed with, (a descendant of Mys. Meredith,) states every fact that her 
mother does, almost literally. She being a child, and having the confidence of both 
her mother and uncle, was permitted to be present when they talked the matter over; re- 
collects that her uncle was to put up for her mother, a building, on her land, and further, 
that she was present when Mrs. Breckinridge, the widow of John Brecktnridge, again 
talked the affair over, after her uncle's death, when her aunt admitted the whole of her 
mother's statement, and told her not to fear, for she could prove her right; at least, such 
was the substance of her statements to me. Let those who doubt, speak to her, as she 
is well known, and is the elder married lady of the Meredith family that survives. I 
also present the reader with a letter from the other married daughter of Mrs. Meredith, 
as folio weth: 

Meredith Lawn, Nov. 2, 1841. 

DEAR Sir: — In reply to your note on the subject of the land obtained by uncle John Breckinridge 
from my father, I state that I have repeatedly heard my mother say that my grandfather (Col.Saml. 
Meredith) owed John Breckinridge a small sum of money, perhaps, Jforty pounds; and my father 
knowing it, told John Breckinridge that as his father, Col. Meredith, had given him a large fortune in 
this country, in land, he would assume the pay merit of the debt himself, and it rested so for years, not 
being called upon for the payment of the debt, it was not paid when my father proposed selling his 
land in this State, and removing to some other State. When it was known by my uncle John Breckin- 
ridge, he came over to my father's with a written mortgage for a certain parcel of a tract of land on 
which my father resided ; stating at the same time, that he was sorry to observe from an advertisement 
in the newspapers, that mj father intended leaving the neighborhood, and taking his sister from 
living near him ; expressed great interest for her , ana great regret at the idea of being separated from 
his sister; and told her with a view to prevent my father from selling, he proposed that he would sign 
this mortgage, telling him that he intended to give it to mother. My father refused to give him a 
mortgage on any of his land, telling him, if he wanted the money he could raise it, (he beingaman 
of wealth, could have at any time paid the debt.) Uncle John Breckinridge said that he did not wish 
my father to pay it then, he was not in want of money. Sometime afterwards he saw my mother, and 
proposed that she would unite with him, and persuade my father to mortgage some of his land to* 
him, and that he would secure it to my mother; she believed him to be sincefein his intentions; and a 
time was fixed upon when he could come to my lather's. My mother joined her brother, and by their 
united exertions, they succeeded in persuading my father to sign the paper which took from him 355- 
acres of land. This is as nearasl can recollect, a true statement given me by my mother. 

When in Virginia, in the year 1830, I heard uncle James Breckinridge say, that he had conversed 
with his brother John on the same subject; lhat he stated to him his having taken this land from my 
father for the benefit of my mother; that he never intended to take it from his sister, and he (uncle 
James Breckinridge) observed, that he thought it such an unjust act, taking it from my father for so 
small a consideration, and deceiving my mother was such an iniquitous thing, he did not think the 
heirs of his brother could prosper on it. 

In answer to your next inquiry, I never heard my mother express any particular regard for Mr. 
Robert J. Breckinridge, nor did 1 ever hear her speak of any kindness she received fro>n him. In re- 
lation to the fence, I recollect, that when Mr. Breckinridge came in possession of the land, formerly 
my father's there was a dispute about some rails, which he said were his; the negroes had taken them 
without knowledge that they were Mr. Breckinridge's, and put them on a fence on the land of my 
mother ; he sent a constable and directed him to correct the slaves; she prevailed with the constable 
not to punish them at that time, my father being very ill; this was a short time before his death. 

With respect, yours, &c. 
To Robert Wickliffe, Sr. ELIZA B. COLEMAN. 

The gentleman charges me with falsehood in saying that he holds the land obtained 
from his aunt, at a price merely nominal, as 1 said I" mas informed, and then states that 
he holds it for fourteen dollars per acre, paid in 1824, when he got possnssion; that he 
then bought it of his father's heirs, and pretends to say that $14 per acre was then a 
full price for it. This, every man in the county knows, is untrue. No such land, I be- 
lieve, has been sold, for the last 30 years, for that price, in Fayette. 

I fixed no price. I understood that he had charged himself twelve dollars for it, but if 
it were fourteen, I deny that it was a fair price, had he been in a situation to buy and 
his futher's heirs to sell; but how dare ht, when trustee for his father's infant and mar- 
ried heirs, to buy in the estate at auy price. His brother Cabell had died, leaving a 
widow and helpless children houseless and homeless. The share of his widow, who 
was his sole devisee, was ninety-one acres, which would have been a home for her near 
the graves of her children, father and grandfather. That land is now worth seventy- 



17 



five dollars per acre, and if divided and sold, her part would be 7,000 dollars; and yet 
has that faithful trustee taken it from the widow and destitute children of Cabell Breck- 
inridge, at less than fourteen hundred dollars; and if he has ever paid them one dollar 
for it, it was, I verily believe, with sacrificing sales which he made of other lands be- 
longing to his father's heirs; and if Letitia was then dead, I should like to know how 
tnuch this faithful trustee paid her children for their interest in Brsedalbane'! 

The next assault of the gentleman on me, is a new version of his story about my 
pleading the statute of limitations to a suit brought against me by a manufacturer, for 
clothes sold me for my slaves. In my speech, I gave the statement the lie, in the face 
and teeth of ihe slanderer. I stated that I had never been sued by a merchant or 
manufacturer in my life, as I verily believed, and that the whole story was a miserable 
fabrication. The gentleman now admits that he told a falsehood, but fabricates a new 
tale about a suit against my overseer, equally false and malicious. As I can do nothing 
more or less with this story than pin the falsehood to the sleeve of the fabricator, I will 
leave him to hi* unenviable position to coin new falsehoods relative to myself, my over* 
seers and slaves. But does the gentleman object to the statu le of limitations'! He says 
his mother is excellent; that his uncle Bob Harrison could spare as much honesty as 
would do for a colomy of such rogues as myself; and that his brother-in-law, Alfred 
Grayson, was the very spirit of Chivalry and honorable feelings — and yet this very 
trinity of all that is honest and virtuous, as administrators to his father, in a suit of 
Wood against Breckinridge's Administrators, (a suit Wherein his father was charged 
with the receipt of money for a client, and which he had used and denied he ever re- 
ceived ,) plead the statute of limitation! If ihese illustrious personages, to enrich his 
father's estate, plead this odious act, why may not plebeans, like myself, plead it? Is 
it only honorable for the Breckinridges to plead it, and is the statute only a shield to 
Brsedalbane and Cabellsdale tenantry, against stale and iniquitous demands'? The 
strutting parson of Breedalbane can take cover under the statute of limitation, and au- 
daciously pleads infancy against half the crimes I convict him of, and no honor lost, but 
if a poor man, that was once my overseer, pleads the statute, parson Brsedalbane preach- 
es us a sermon upon the crime of pleading the odious statute against stale demands! 
Thus much for this falsehood. 

The next thing the fellow is again at, is to give a new version of his falsehoods 
about the turnpike gate fees I owed and refused to pay. In my reply, I charged him 
with fabricating the story, and being guilty, in charging me with refusing to pay fees I 
owed the turnpike company, of a naked untruth. In his lost edition of the slander, he 
abandons his first tale, and tells a story about my having a quarrel with my old friend, 
Gen. Shelby. I cannot believe that Gen. Shelby tolerates this doughty parson, in. 
sticking his spoon into his dish. I shall therefore forbear to explain. If the General 
and myself differ and go to law about our rights, what is it to this negro champion 1 ? 
This would-be successor to George Thompson has enough to do, one would think, in ef- 
fecting the liberation of our poor slaves. Indeed, if any one could believe the pious 
parson of Breedalbane*, he has too much to do in saving the souls of poor sinners, and 
especially his own soul, to play the dog and bark at me for Gen. Shelby. Gen. Shelby 
is a man, and not a dog, and I assure the world, as well as pious Brsedalbane, that any 
controversy I ever have with Gen. Shelby shall not be settled through a barking dog. 

The next charge which the pious parson makes against me is a falsehood that he told on 
me, in saying that i had not set my own negroes free; that when he set his own negroes 
free, I had only set my wife's negroes free, and in doing which I had defrauded her out 
of a large estate. Now, this statement, brazen as it is, is j in every sentence, a most 
wilful falsehood; nor would I notice it but to expose to the Presbyterian church what a 

*Brasdalbane is the aristocratic name the gentleman has given his aunt's 355 acre estate, after & 
place he saw or heard of in Europe, on his trip to supersede George Thompson, as general ne^ro 
agent in these United States. 



3 



18 



miscreant at harbors within its bosom. In civilized controversy, the sacred union of 
man and wife is never invaded; and as I stated, none but a brute will invade it. My 
wife is a member of 1 he Presbyterian Church, and as such, has a claim upon it for pro- 
tection from the insults and falsehoods of one of its preachers. And while this connex- 
ion exists, as long it has, between her and that Church, it admits a biped into fellow- 
ship, and allows him to destroy her peace of mind, by dragging before the world her 
conduct, and making an open assault upon her domestic happiness and conjugal relations 
with her husband, by falsely and infamously insinuating that her husband has set her 
negroes free, in violation of her rights and those of her lawful heirs; and has, by de- 
claring that she has permitted herself to be swindled out of her estate by her husband, 
not only done to her injury, but that of her nearest kindred and heirs, who, he declares, 
will, in despite of what he has done, sue for and recover it as soon as she dies. In this, 
the wretch not only attempts to breed discord between man and wife, but to create hatred 
between Mrs. Wickliffe and her relatives. In order still farther to carry out his fiendish 
threat, made ten years ago, of pursuing me with his vengeance through life, I am told 
that he is giving out, in speeches, that he has, among the old papers of his futher, a 
copy of my wife's father's will, and that by it she has only a life estate, and that the 
remainder will, on her death, pass to the heirs of Gen. Levi Todd, in fee. By this lat- 
ter falsehood and villainy, the reverend parson hopes, first, to stir up disquiet in the citi- 
zens of Lexington, and others who live in the country, who hold deeds to lots or lands 
from my wife, as well as to slander my own title; and if he fails in this, he expects, at 
all events, to excite the families connected with mv wife, against myself, as the cause 
of the law's not disposing of my wife's estate; and if nothing else is effected, that he 
will certainly mortify my wife and myself, and excite in our minds a jealousy that her 
relations wiih whom it Ikis been generally our happiness to live in intimate relation- 
ship and mutual kindness, design to violate her settled purpose, in disposing of her 
property by legally annulling what she has done or may do. While it is but true that 
the sensibility of my wife -lias been wounded by the fabrications of the beast, as regards 
his attempts at making her or me believe that he is warranted or authorized to make them 
by her relations, they have failed to have the desired effect. We believe that scarce 
one of her numerous and respectable relations would accept, much less sue for, what 
belonged to their relation, which she desired to bestow upon another; and as regards 
myself, if any there be who desire to disturb her rights, the doors of the courts shall be 
now opened, and their redress, (if aught exists, that is true, said by Mr. Breckinridge,) 
shall be instantaneous; or, if such Will of Col. Todd exists, produce if, and it shall be 
executed to its letter. 

The gentleman, after admitting that his former tale of the Moses case was untrue, 
gives a new version of it, equally as false and malicious as his first story was. In this 
last story, he has had the impudence to vouch Judge Hickey and General Combs, in- 
tending to back his falsehood by respectable names. If Gen. Combs is contented to al- 
low the reverend hypocrite to pack his falsehood on him, by his silence, be it so. The 
man that will allow his name to be used to pass off a falsehood, shall never have my 
appeal to prove its falsity. Gen. Combs knows that the statement of Breckinridge rel- 
ative to my conduct in that case, is infamously false, and that if he had made it on oath, 
I would convict him of perjury by the oaths of at least fifty witnesses.; and yet he per- 
mits Mr. Breckinridge to refer to him as his auther, and remains silent! To refute 
this slander, I must trouble the reader to read the following statements of Judge Hickey, 
who tried the slave Moses, and of Judge Woolley and a part of the Jury, which a 
friend has furnished me with: 

LEXINGTOJV, October 2, 1841. 

Robert Wickliffe, Esq. 

Sir — I received your letter of the 30th ult. to-day, and take this first moment of leisure to 
answer it : 

J presided as Jndgr of the Fayette Circuit Court on the trial of the yellow man Moses, a slave of 



19 



the lata Joseph Roger?, which took place about ten years ago. He was indicted for the crime of 
rape; and the injured person wasa white female, about 15 years of age. She was the witness for the 
Commonwealth, and her testimony proved the crime, committed in a very brutal manner, and fixed 
its perpetration on Moses. Much sympathy and interest was manifested upon the recital of her 
injuries. The counsel tor Moses consisted of yourself and two other gentlemen of the bar. A black 
man uamed Bill , who stood indicted in the same court for murder, and for another rape, was brought 
from the jail as a witness for the accused. Bill swore that the act complained of was done by him, 
and not by Moses, and that it was not a case of violence, but of mutual consent. This testimony 
evidently increased the excited state of the public mind ; because if true, to its full extent, it showed 
that the girl was a base and perjured imposter,and if false, it greatfy aggravated her wrong. Htr 
character for veracity and chastity, was directly impugned by his statement, and her previous charac- 
ter and standing were proved to be gcod and fair. I had reason to believe at the time, that the in- 
dignation which arose at this period of the trial, was in part directed (unjustifiably, as I thought) 
against the counsel of the accused, and particularly against yourself. To what extent this feelinj 
prevailed, I am unable to say; but I considered it my duty to interpose my judicial charge to the 
officers of the court, and my advice and admonition to the people present, for she preservation of 
order, and the prevention of any personal outrage. 

Your deportment upon the trial was decorous to all concerned, and respectful to the young lady; 
and in my opinion, consistent with your professional rights and duties. In your speech to the Jury, 
you expressed regard and commiseration for her, and distinctly admitted her innocence; and that 
Bill's statement, so far as it assailed her honor and truth, was false. But you insisted that Bill wa* 
the guilty person, and that the girl was mistaken as to the individual who had injured her; 
and in connexion with this point, you relied upon other evidence tending to show an alibi in 
favor of Moses. 

I am aware that this application is made to me in consequence of an allusion to the trial of Moses, 
and a reference to me, in the controversy between you and the Rev. R. J. Breckinridge, and have 
therefore, in order to present, in its maternal parts, an intelligible view of the subject, gone farther 
into delal than a mere direct response to your interrogatories might have required. I trust this 
will be taken as my answer to that reference, and to your call, and that it will not be considered by 
either party as anj interference or participation in his quarrel. 

Respectfully, 

THOS. M. HICKEY. 



LEXINGTON, October 30, 1841. 

Sir— Your letter propounding certain interrogatoties to me, in reference to the matters of contro- 
versy between the Rev. Robert J. Breckinridge and yourself, has been received, and instead of 
answering each of them separately, I will proceed to give y ou the substance of my information upon 
all the subjects embraced in your letter. 

First, in the case of Ormsby and Breckinridge, I recollect distinctly that you argued this case in 
the Court of Appeals. Since Mr. Breckinridge's publication, I have seen Mr. Chinn and Judge 
Robertson, upon this subject. Mr. Chinn informed that he had given Mr. Breckinridge no 
statement as to the case, except he recollected that /, mysell, had argued it; that he had no recollec- 
tion as to any one else in the cause, and that he did not indeed recollect that he himself had argued 
it, but that he believed he did. Judge Robertson made a similar statement, recollecting distinctly 
that I had argued it, but having no recollection as to any other gentleman. I then went into a state- 
ment of the facts connected with the argument, which I will here detaii, and both of the gentlemen 
agreed in declaring that they had no doubt my statement was correct. I returned to Kentucky in 
thespring of 1828, forthe purpose of residing. In July or August of that year, while a member of 
your family, you handed me the papers in the case of Ormsby and Breckinridge, stating that I might 
employ my time in preparing a brief for its argument. 

I prepared the brief in compliance with your wishes, and submitted it to Mr. Chinn and yourself. 
It was approved after some additions made to it by Mr. Chinn. Preceding the argument of the cause, 
Mr. Breckinridge, in a conversation with me, expressed his wish that you should argue it as one of 
the counsel, and as the rule of the Court only permitted two counsel on a side to argue it, it must be 
a matter of arrangement between Mr. Chinn and myself as to which of us should argue it. He based 
his desire that you should argue it, not only on your professional ability and fame, but your intimacy 
with his father's business. I immediately communicated the desire of Mr. Breckinridge to Mr. Chinn, 
who very generously proposed to retire from the argument of the cause, in order thai I might argue 
it, having prepared the brief, and as I had never argued a case in the Court of Appeals. This I de- 
clined, and Mr. Chinn then suggested that he thought he could arrange it so that all three of us 
might argue it, as there were three parties in the suit, viz: Ormsby on the one part, and Breckinridge's 
Heirs and Breckinridge's Executors on the other. Mr. Chinn accordingly made the suggestion to 
the Court, and the Court, after stating that the counsel could determine for themselves whether there 
was a conflict of interest between the Executors and Heir*, tvhich would entitle more than two coun- 
sel under the rule to argue it, permitted all three ol us to argue it — I making the opening speech, and 
you and Mr. Chinn following me in the argument. 

The next sabject to which I will respond, is in reference to the trial of Moses, a slave, of Joseph 
Rogers, for rape. Shortly after the apprehension of Moses, you informed me that-Mr. or Mrs. Ro- 
gers, (I do not now recollect which,) had called on you, for the purpose of procuring. yout services 
in his defence; that you informed them that you felt unwilling to engage in this case, as it was a 
description of practice lrom which you had retired, and had no disposition, to rc-engage ; that upon 



20 



the urgent solicitation of them however, yea had promised to attend to the investigation of the 
questions of law connected with the case, and the examination of the testimony, but would leave the 
argument of the cause to Mr. Benjamin Warfield and myself. Upon consultation, Mr. Warfield, you 
and myself agreed that we would'have to rest the defence upon personal indentity; having received 
information that another slave, Bill, had been apprehended upon a similar charge, and had confessed 
the perpetration of the act, and likewise the act tor which Moses stood charged. Neither of us ever 
doubted that the act of violence had been com niited, but all believed that another and not Moses 
was the guilty perpetrator, and under that view and that alone, was the trial conducted from the begin- 
ning to the end. The examination of the girl was one of great delicacy, and I well recollect, when 
the Attorney for the Commonwealth closed his examination of her, you examined her with great 
mildness, having the most delicate regard for her feelings and situation. Among the witnesses exam- 
ined on the part of the defence, the slave Bill was introduced. In reply to your question as to his 
knowledge of the commission of the act, and of the person who committed it, he replied in substance, 
that he had himself committed it, and went on to state, either then or afterwards, to a question from 
you or the Attorney for the Commonwealth, (I do not now recollect which,) that he perpetrated it 
with the consent of the girl herself. The latter part of the statement was not credited by the coun- 
sel for the Commonwealth or the Prisoner. Upon the argument of th& cause, I recollect distinctly 
that you admitted to the Jury that that part ot Bill's statement was false, and slanderous upon the 
character of an innocent girl; but you contended that instead of weakening the other part of his 
statement, as to the confession of his guilt, it strengthened it, insisting that it was natu ral always, in 
persons confessing crime, to offer excuses or extenuating circumstances in mitigation of their guilt 
and punishment. In your whole argument, there vyas not an expression or sentiment uttered, in rela- 
tion to the girl, to which a brother or a mother being present could have taken the slightest excep- 
tion. As to the fee, Mr. Warfield collected it himself. It was one hundred dollars, divided between 
Mr. Warfield and yourself, your part of which you handed to me. 

In a conversation with Mr. Benjamin Warfield, I repeated the above statement, and he acknow* 
ledged it to be in substance correct, with the exception of the part which \ efers to your employment 
in the case, and the presentation of your part of the fee to myself, of which he had no personal 
knowledge. He fuj ther stated to me that your conduct in that trial was worthy of commendation 
and that you had conducted yourself with firmness, ability and propriety, and that he had so express- 
ed himself. One word more upon this subject; it was not your intention to argue the case, but to 
have left that part of the defence to Mr. Warfield and myself. But the excitement was great, and 
you informed me that you had received information that if you attempted to argue the case, violence 
to you had been threatened-, that you thought that you had given the people of Fayette county suffi- 
cient evidence that you were not t© be frightened by a mob, but you supposed that you would have to 
give them another instance, and would therefore argue the ease. 

The above statement, in response to your letter, is all $hat is material, of which I have personal 
knowledge. Respectfully, 

A, K. WOOLLEY, 

We state that we were of the Jury that tried Mose3, the slave of Joseph Rogers, for rape upon a 
white woman, and that R. Wickliffe was of the counsel for Moses, and that said Wickliffe made no 
imputation against the character or veracity of the female ; but his whole conduct, so far as we observ- 
ed, was decorous and respectful to the feelings of the female and court, so far as we now recollect or 
believe. Given under our hands this 20th day of October, 1841. 

JAS. HAMILTON, 
JOHN TRIMBLE, 
HENRY GILBERT. 

The object of Mr. Breckinridge, in attempting to prove, by either the want of memo- 
ry or principle, matters contradictory of my statements as to immaterial facts of nearly 
forty years standing, is nothing more or less than an attempted set off and escape for the 
positive falsehoods he uttered in October last, and of which I convicted him from under 
his own hand and out of his own mouth. Yet am I, in order to place his conduct in 
the odious point of view which it deservs, compelled to notice these immaterial issues, 
to the great consumption of the reader's time, and against my own inclination. After- 
reading these papers, could any reader suppose that there was a being upon earth base 
enough to keep alive, in the public mind, the distressing fate of a poor but innocent slave, 
arising from the defective condition of human knowledge and human tribunals, by fabric 
eating base falsehoods upon an old man who had interposed his counsel and weight to 
rescue a fellow creature from the awful punishment of death — to save a poor slave, who 
was as innocent of the crime, for which he died as the child unborn'? I had measurably 
withdrew from practice, when Mr. Breckinridge, as I verily believe, with others associa- 
ted with him, in 1830, by public speeches, written pamphlets, and newspaper para- 
graphs, in defence of the rights of negroes, and asserting the necessity of abolishing 
slavery, had excited in the slaves of the county and city, a spirit of insubordination that 



21 



filled the county of Fayette with murders, arson and rapes, to such a degree that, in 
one year, there were about fifteen committals of slaves, for capital offences, and many 
executions of them, (as I proved by the records of the jailor) when there had not been 
one case of an execution of a slave for fifteen years before they commenced their opera- 
tions in favor of abolition. In this state of great public excitement, at least one murder 
and two horrible rapes had been committed in the same neighborhood, by a single negro 
called Bill, the property of Mr. John Rogers. For one of these rapes, the negro, Mo- 
ses, the slave of Mr. Joseph Rogers, Sen'r, was suspected and arrested. Mr. Rogers, 
being both an old friend and client, and too feeble to see me, sent his wife to engage me 
as counsel for Moses. I declined appearing myself, but directed that Mr. B. Warfield 
and Judge Woolley should be employed, and, at the special request of Mrs. Rogers, 
visited Moses in the jail, whom, she protested, she believed to be innocent. When I did 
so, I learnt, lo my perfect satisfaction, that he could not be guilty; that his wife had, a 
few days before he was charged with the rape, died, and on her death bed had requested 
him to hand over the few articles of Sunday clothes she left to her little sister, then 
hired to the man where the injured female lived; that while the death of his wife was 
on his feelings, he had, late in the afternoon, got leave of his overseer to take the things 
to his wife's sister, which he did, and arrived at the house about twilight; that he found 
no one at home but the white girl and the little negro girl, the man and his wife having 
left for the night; that after handing the articles to his wife's sister, and learning that 
they were to be left alone, he asked them if they were not afraid, and advised them to 
get some one to stay with them; that he left about dark, and being tired, he slept at his 
young master's quarter, with his slaves, about half way home from where he left the 
girls. That he stayed all night at H. Rogers', was stated by his slaves and sworn to by 
two of them. Moses referred to several occurrences besides, to establish his innocence, 
which I neither recollect nor deem material to state, except one, and that was his meet- 
ing a free man of color, more than a mile on his way home. This fact was verified by 
the negro's oath also. I left the jail fully satisfied from the manner of Moses, that he 
was innocent. But, added to this, in a few days afterwards, Edward C. Payne, Esq. 
learning that Bill, the slave of John Rogers, was committed on a charge of rape and 
murder, visited the jail to see him, having once lievd in his master's family, and known 
Bill from a small boy. On conversing with Mr. Payne, he informed me that Bill had 
confessed the crime of murder and rape, for which he was committed, and further stated 
that he had, before he did so, raped the girl for which Moses was committed; that he 
told him that he first went to the house about 10 o'clock, with ttvo negroes, to trade with 
its owner, and finding him not at home, he affectod to take leave of his companions, and 
afterwards returned to the house and perpetrated the deed. He detailed the occurrence 
to Payne, of every material fact, as to time, manner, &c, precisely as the girl charg- 
ed the act to have been done. Mr. Payne is both a judicious and excellent man,, 
and I had no doubt of the truth of all he related as coming from Bill. The two, 
negroes that went with him to the place, verified Bill's statement of having gone 
with them to the house on the night the crime was committed, as stated by Payne* 
Although I had refused to appear, I thought it my duty, as a man, to assist the coun- 
sel of Moses with my advice, in arranging the evidence for the defence, and went to 
the Court-House with that view; but when I entered the Court-House, I passed through 
a dense crowd, (some of whom I observed to be armed with clubs, &c.,) and heard 
threats not only against the negroes, but their counsel. Seeing this excitement, I fear- 
ed the poor creature, however innocent, might be convicted and hung; and believing that 
I had not only the confidence, but, to some extent, the affection of the great mass of the 
citizens of the county, and that I could, both as a Senator and as a man, do as much or 
more than than any other to allay the ferment, and feeling that 1 ought to do so, I en- 
tered upon the defence; and although J was unable to allay the excitement altogether, 
my conduct to the poor girl was both benevolent and kind, and in my address to the jury 



22 

I did not impeach a single statement she made, but attempted to show that, the offence 
being committed in the night she had mistaken Bill for Moses. I was equally courteous' 
and respectful to all the witnesses of the Commonwealth, and to the people. Bill was 
called in, and the only question I asked or permitted to be asked him, was, if he had 
perpetrated the crime? to which he answered in the affirmative. The Commonwealth's 
Attorney then proceeded in a course of interrogatories, such as when and how he effected 
it, &C.&C, in answering which the negro not only prevaricated, but swore a lie in sta- 
ting that it was by appointment. Here I arose in my place and protested against what 
the negro stated as to the girl's assent, as untrue, and expressed a hope that the Attorney 
would not press a miserable negro into a course of statement not demanded by the case. 
The attorney desisted, and in my defence I took occasion to distinctly say, that I did not 
believe, and that the jury ought not to believe a word the negro deposed to, as to the con- 
sent of the female. The girl admitted that she never had seen Moses, except when he 
brought the articles to his wife's sister. The negroes were about the same size and 
color, and both young. The jury reiired, and were divided for several days, and until I 
left town; after which I learned that the jury had been called in, and the girl again call- 
ed on to state her testimony, when she stated that she still believed Moses to be the 
perpetrator. The jury retired, and a verdict of death was rendered before my return. 

Moses had the aid of clergymen, during his confinement, and at the place of 
'execution, where, in presencs of the thousands assembled, he declared his innocence; and 
Bill, who was executed at the s.ame time, acknowledged his guilt of the crime for which 
Moses died. One of the clergymen told me that Moses, from the day of his con- 
viction, became religious; that he always declared his innocence when in jail, and 
in private repeatedly told him that he would die innocencently, but willingly, as 
'he trusted his sins were forgiven. 

This is a faithful detal of the melancholy fate of poor Moses, for defending whom 
this wretched being, Breckinridge, has so frequently and so infamously brought me 
'before the public, with the same fiendish malice with which he has pursued me in 
every other slander. 

The gentleman, because I said that I had known his father long, and that, in the latter 
part of his life, our acquaintance had matured into a family friendship and intimacy; 
that I saw him in his last illness, and assisted to bury him — has got his faithful friend 
and old master, Doctor Marshall, and his mother, and Doctor Warfield, to certify that I 
was not at Mr. Breckinridge's burial; that 1 never visited him in his last illness; and 
Dr. Warfield and the mother of the gentleman, have been pleased to say, that if there 
was an intimacy between Mr. Breckinridge and myself that they did not know it. Now, 
I should have been pleased to hear Dr. Warfield say, what opportunity he had to know, 
whether I was intimate with Mr. Breckinridge or not. In the year 1805, it is true, 
that Gen. Howard and myself, dined by special invitation, with Mr. Breckinridge. We 
arrived some time before dinner was announced, and before Doctor Warfield and Alfred 
Grayson entered the house, and announced that (Sunday as it was) thay had swapped 
horses, and the Doctor said, the prettiest part of the joke is, we have swapped off our 
wives horses. And except this circumstance, I feel as confident, as I can be of a fact 
of longstanding, that I never, in all my life, had seen the Doctor in company with Mr. 
Breckinridge, and that, to the day of Mr. Breckinridge's death, I never sat at a table 
with Dr. Warfield, or ever saw him in a private gentleman's house. I have barely a 
recollection of seeing Dr. Warfield in 1797, and but for a trifling incident, which I will 
not mention, should not, I presume, have recollected him, until about the time of his 
marriage, which I think happened in 1804 or 5; we could not before that time have resid- 
ed short of a 100 miles apart. Of his ever having been a physician to Mr. Breckin- 
ridge, I never heard until the year 1807, when I was consulted by one of the adminis- 
trators upon the propriety of paying his charges for his attendance. 

Of Mrs. Breckinridge's certificate, that she does not recollect of seeing me, or hear- 



23 



ing that I visited her husband, and attended his burial, I can only say, that, while I can 
readily admit, that she might with truth state it; yet the baseness of the parson, in 
calling on his aged parent to prove what he knew to be untrue, is in no manner lessened, 
by reason of his mother's recollection being dimmed by age; and that he has been prac- 
tising both art and fraud, to extract the statements from his mother, is most manifest. 
Seepage 22d, of his book, where he makes his mother say , that I did not nurse his 
father. 1 had never said that I had nursed him; but if she stated that she did not give 
me the key to search for Woods' papers, or that there was not a family intimacy be- 
tween Mr. Breckinridge's family and mine; and that there was not, until the day of his 
illness, a frequent and family intercourse, both such statements would be untrue. I had 
known Mr. Breckinridge from 1794 — spent at his own house part of two days, and a 
night with him in 1797 — and saw him at the bar almost daily in 1797 and 8 — and often 
met with him at parties and public gatherings. In the winter of 1797, he was a can- 
didate for the Legislature, and run at, by a junto in Lexington, who, to make his 
mortification the keener, if beaten, started Alex. McGregor, who, on the second night 
was announced, I think to be 30 votes ahead of him. In this contest, I assisted to bring 
him out on the last day, not only with my own vote, but with that of other students. At 
the next election he lost every friend he had that run with him; and was as before beaten 
until the last day, not only behind McGregor, but eighth or ninth on the poll, the county 
then sending six members. In this struggle I was for him, whicli he well knew. In 
1799, C©1. Nicholas suggested to the late Judge Logan, that he and myself should 
return to the counties we were raised in, and offer, as anti-emancipators, for representa- 
tives in the convention about to assemble; to this we acceded; but before I left, I attend- 
ed the Bryant Station meeting. I saw Mr. Breckinridge, who conversed with me on the 
subject, explaining his, and Col. Nicholas' plans, to head the abolitionists, &c, at the 
election. The abolitionists were routed almost universally in the State; and from that 
time until I married Mr. Breckinridge's near relation, we often met at the courts and 
other places, particularly in Frankfort and Bardstown, always meeting as political friends 
and acquaintances. After my marriage, I made it a rule to spend each summer, in part 
with Gen. Howard at his seat, and except the summer of 1306, I never was at the 
General's with my family ten days at one time, that Mr. Breckinridge did not visit me, 
and dine with me, including always his wife and daughters, and before I returned, I felt 
it a duty I owed to his kindness, to both dine and spend a night at his house. Indeed, 
except a brother-in-law's house, and the grove, Mr. Breckinridge's house, until his death, 
was the only private house after my marriage, I ever spent anight at in Fayette county; 
of these visits and of the gratification evinced upon my marriage, by Mr. Breckinridge, 
none living knows better than the aged mother of the reverend gentleman . 

As for the story which he writes for his mother, about your precious father, it is not 
only untrue, but the wretch, in 1827, received from me the whole of Wood's papers, 
with an account of the manner I came by them; and I will stake my fortune that he has 
them now, and had them under his eye when he penned the falsehoods, denying that I 
had appeared in Wood's case for his father's administrators. Yes, he not only had the 
papers before him, but had seen the docket that exhibited my name as counsel also; and 
yet he brazened even in this a vile slander and falsehood. To prove which, I offer not 
the certificate of my mama, nor that of my teacher, Dr. Marshall, but the certificate of 
the Clerk. Mr. Clay was originally employed in the defence, but he was elected to 
Congress in 1810, and when the suit was dismissed, was not only in Congress, but 
acting as Speaker of that body. He never did, to my recollection appear in the cause, 
or have any thing to do with it after I was employed. True, he filed two pleas before I 
appeared in the cause for the administrators of the gentleman's father; and one of them 
was a plea of the statue of limitation, to a suit against them for money collected by 
him as an attorney; and yet this pious, honest son, who could and would have had to 
avail himself of the statute, but for me, to release him of a demand little short of one 



24 



thousand pounds, is horrified that I filed for Hersman, who Was once my overseer, the" 
plea of the statute of limitation, to a small, but stale merchants account. I have al- 
ready said too much about trifles; but I mean not to leave the gentleman an inch of whole 
skin upon his back, when I again hand him over to public scorn. 

When I appeared first in the case of Wood, the court refused me a continuance, abso- 
lutely, but as well as my memory serves, postponed the trial for a few days, for me to 
search Mr. Breckinridge's papers, and this was one of the reasons of my having hastily 
to visit his late residence on Sunday. I lived about 10 miles from Cabell's Dale, and 
Mr. Harrison about 3 miles, and by appointment, he was to meet me at Mr. Breckin- 
ridge's late residence and assist in the search after the papers. I did not reach Cabell's 
Dale until at least 11 o'clock, when I saw no person at home, certainly no white person 
except Mrs. Breckinridge, whom I had not spoken to from 1805, nor seen after her hus- 
band's burial, until then. I told her my business, and that 1 must return. She 
invited me into a back room, pointed out her husband's paper desk, and handed me 
'the key. I opened the desk, where I found all the papers, not broken open, in perfect 
order, but about a half a bushel of them were lying in a pile on the top of the desk, 
opened and mixed up together; this 1 had no doubt was the work of Grayson. I had 
scarcely commenced the search, when Mr. Harrison joined me, and one of us (I think 
myself.) discovered Wood's papers. The cause was afterwards continued, as I then sup- 
posed, to get Breckinridge's letters, denying that he had ever received the money. But 
at the next court, I was visited in my office, by a genteel stranger, who introduced him- 
sely to me as a son of the plaintiff, and, who informed me that his father was an old 
friend of Mr. Breckinridge, and much concerned about being compelled to sue, and had 
directed him, Upon getting judgment, to allow the executors any reasonable time to pay, 
&c. He further stated, that he had seen Mrs. Breckinridge, Mrs. Grayson and Mr. 
Harrison, who all told him that I had lhe business in my hands, and that whatever ar- 
rangement he made with me would be satisfactory. I had the papers lying before me, 
with a view to get an order of court, to take the depositions of Wilson C. Nicholas and 
John Wood, to whom, or by whom, the greater part of the money was paid, as appeared 
from Mr. Breckinridge's account. At first, I had determined to let the young man 
indulge himself in the delusion he seemed to be under, but his manner was so frank and 
gentlemanly, that I concluded to undeceive him, I then handed him the papers; on pe- 
rusing them he seemed astonished, and with true filial piety, exclaimed, "Sir, my father 
has forgotten this transaction! You have done me one favor — will you do me another, 
by consenting to a continuance of this cause, and allowing me to take a copy of the 
papers for my father. 1 can truly say, that unless there is something behind these 
papers, you will not be again troubled with the case." To this I agreed, and continued 
the case down to 1812, when I had the suit dismissed, and my reward is, that thirty 
years after I had thus served the family, an unprincipled member of the family not only 
refuses to pay my account, but attempts to ruin my character. I have, however, nailed 
him to the post as a slanderer, by the record itself. I here ask the reader to read the 
following copy of the docket book and certificate of the Clerk of the Fayette Circuit 
Court: 

KENTUCKY— Fayette Circuit Court. Clerks Office, > 

September 16, 1841.$ , 

I, Harry I. Bodley, Clerk of the Court, for the Circuit aforesaid, do certify, that on the issue 
docket of said Court in a certain suit at law, in which David Wood was plaintiff and John Breckin- 
ridge's adm'rs. were defendants, and which suit was commenced in the year 1809, on which docket 
Wm. T. Barry was marked as attorney for plaintiff" and Henry Clay, as attorney for defendant; that 
at the September term of said Court, 1811, it appears from said docket that the names of Mr. Clay 
and R. Wickliffe were both marked as attorneys for the defendants and were continued on from that 
time until the September term, 1812, at whichYime the suit was dismissed for want of prosecution. 
Given under my hand as Clerk, the date above. 

HARRY T. BODLEY, Clerk, 

By Jo. R. Megawan, D. C. 



25 



To return to the statements of Dr. Marshall, Dr. E. Warfield, and Mrs. Breckinridge, 
that they did not see me at Mr. Breckinridge's funeral, nor during his sickness — these 
certifiers all, no doubt, except Dr. Marshall, tell the truth, and I will allow him to forget 
as mnch as he pleases after a lapse of thirty-five years. In the month of August, 1806, 
Mr. Breckinridge and myself met, by accident, to breakfast, at Calloway's tavern, in 
Winchester, where we spent the day until after dinner, together, consulting upon a mat- 
ter which I shall not relate, of great political and personal concern to Mr. Breckinridge 
himself. He was returning from the Olympian Springs; where he had been for his health; 
complained of weakness, fatigue, &c, when I suggested that as soon as my gig was 
repaired, he should take a seat with me as far as the grove home, and then, if he wished 
it, he might take the gig all the way to his house. The blacksmith had promised to have 
the gig ready by dinner, but after dinner, he informed us that the gig would not be ready 
until morning. Mr. Breckinridge, of course, went on and left me, and I never saw him 
again until I saw him on his death bed; but he told General Howard that he was on 
horseback till about 11 o'clock at night, the day he left me, and had not been well after- 
wards . In a day or two after our interview, I set out to attend my Circuit Courts, com- 
mencing at Louisville, leaving my family at Howard's Grove. At Louisville, I was 
taken with a fever, and was unable, for sixty days, to get further back than Bardstown. 
On reaching Howard's Grove, I was for the first time informed that Gen. Howard was 
at Mr. Breckinridge's, and of Mr. Breckinridge's perilous condition. I arrived at How- 
ard's Grove, on the night of Friday, much exhausted and weak, so much so that I could 
not visit Mr. Breckinridge the next day; but Sunday was a warm pleasant day, and 
when I was about to start, Mrs. Howard, the aunt of Mr. Breckinridge, expressed a 
great wish to again see her nephew, and said that she thought she could stand the ride, 
if I would take her under my protection. To this 1 assented, and set out with heron 
horseback, the road being impassible for a carriage. She was aged nearly eighty, and 
very infirm, so that although we set out early, we did not reach Mr. Breckinridge's until 
nearly dinner. On arriving there, I met General Howard, who seemed in high spirits, 
stating that Mr. Breckinridge was much better, &c. On entering the hall, to my utter 
astonishment, who should I see but this same Dr. Marshall, Mr. Breckinridge's conven- 
ient certifier upon all occasions. I knew that the most unfriendly relations existed be- 
tween the Doctor and Mr. Breckinridge, (and this I knew from Mr. Breckinridge him- 
self,) which still heightened my surprise. In a few minutes, I was introduced to Dr. 
Watson, of whom I had never heard, much less seen, before. Both these gentlemen 
seemed merry and perfectly at their ease, conversing with the persons then in the hall. 
Gen. Howard had me s©on introduced into Mr. Breckinridge's room, where I found no 
human being but Dr. VV. Warfield and Mr. Breckinridge. I was surprised at his appear- 
ance, and then thought, and now think that he did not know me, and that his mind was stu- 
pified with laudanum. On my asking him how he was, he answered with a vacant stare, 
•"I am recovering." I knew Dr. Warfield well, and asked him what he thought of Mr. 
Breckinridge's condition. He replied, "The gentlemen" (meaning Marshall and Wat- 
son) "say he is better, but I do not think so." I was summoned to dinner, dined, and 
then took Mrs. Howard into the room; when, although he appeared to converse coher- 
ently, I was still more confirmed in the belief that his Doctors had only destroyed, to 
some extent, his sense of pain, and that he was in no wise relieved. On parting with 
Gen. Howard, I told him my fears. He replied, "he is much better." "But," said I, 
"Dr. Warfield says he is not." "Oh," said he, "the old man is only piqued that Mar- 
shall has succeeded in relieving him. Marshall says there is no danger of him, and 
that if he had been called in at first, he could have relieved him in twenty-four hours." 
T returned to Howard's Grove with Mrs. Howard, who informed me that she had, on a 
former visit, advised h^r nephew to send for Marshall. I think I afterwards heard that 
Marshall and Watson had left either the day I did, or the next day. Of one thing I feel 
assured, that is, when, in a day or two afterwards, I visited Mr. Breckinridge, neither of < 



4 



26 



them was there. I went and returned on this last visit, with the late Leonard Young, 
Esq., an old and devoted friend to Mr. Breckinridge and to Gen. Howard. But, on reach- 
inf the house, instead of seeing the merry faces 1 had before witnessed, I found neither of 
the merry Doctors there, but found a few neighbors and some of the family in the hall, 
and every thing shrouded in gloom. On Gen. Howard's learning that 1 waited, with 
Mr. Young, to see Mr. Breckinriege, he met Mr. Young and myself at the door, and 
refused us both admittance. When Mr. Young retired back into the house, Mr. How- 
ard explained to me that he was fearful Mr. Young would talk too loud for Mr. Breckin- 
ridge's strength, but that if I would step into his room, he would set with Mr. Young 
until my return. When I again entered, I found the faithful but melancholy friend of 
Mr. Breckinridge, Dr. W. Warfield, still hanging over his almost dying friend. After a 
moment's gaze upon his countenance, and speaking to him, I saw too plainly that all was 
over with him. Doctor Warfield asked me what I then thought. I replied, 'he is sink- 
ing.' 'Yes,' said he, 'you are right; you will remember what I told you when you were 
here before.' I know that I asked General Howard then what had become of Marshall, 
and that he replied that he had gone home, but my best impression is he further said 
that he had sent for him, or he had been sent for. 

Before I reached Howard's Grove, the family had arranged to send a messenger to 
enquire of Mr. Breckinridge's condition, every other day; on my return I gave it as my 
opinion, that he could live but a few days, and had a messenger sent every day, until I 
received a note from General Howard that Mr. Breckinridge was dead, and asking me 
if the day was favorable, to bring to the burial, his mother and sisters, that were able to 
come, my wife being known to him to be unable to attend. The day was extremely 
unfavorable, 60 much so, that Mrs . Howard could not venture out, but I took Miss How* 
nrd and Mrs. Parker under my protection to the burial, and in company with their 
brother returned with them. Every member of the Howard family is dead except Mrs. 
Parker, whose letter as well as that of Mr. Kercheval, I will here trouble the reader to- 
read: 

Mr. WlCKLIFFK: 

I hare received your note of yesterday, wishing to know if I recollected being' accompanied 
by yourself to the late Joha Breckinridge's funeral, I reply that you were at the burial, and re- 
turned from thence with me to the Howard Grove. 

M. PARKER. 

Dear Sir: — I remember shortly after the daath of Mr. John Breckinridge, in 1806, of meeting 
you in company with my father, and you informed me of the death of Mr. Breckinridge, and that 
v«u attended his burial. 

J. B. KERCHEVAL. 

October 24th, 1841. 

If either Dr. E. Warfield or Dr. Marshall, was at the burial, I have no recollection of 
eeeing them there. The day being unfavorable, the company was a small one, and I 
being a stranger, except with the family, could, of course, recollect but few. Indeed, of 
all that I recollect that were there, except old Mrs. Breckinridge and children, and Mrs. 
Parker, only two survive, Matthews Flournoy and Porter Clay, Esqs. Mr. Flournoy, 
I had never .spoken to, and Porter Clay, I barely knew. Mr. Clay made the coffin and 
superintended the burial. Shortly after he arrived from Lexington with the coffin, we 
placed the corpse in it, leaving it uncovered for a few moments, when Mrs. Breckinridge 
burst into the room, I think unattended except by her little daughter, Mary, evincing 
both of them, the most distressing agony. At my suggestion they were removed, and 
we consigned the, corpse to the earth. Except this unpleasant sight of Mrs. Breckin- 
ridge, I never laid eyes upon her I believe, either at the burial, or during the illness of 
Mr. Breckinridge. Of her memory I am sure she conld say nothing. Yet has this 
bopefiil son, through her, to cover his guilt and shame, attempted to make me, 
iht trifling being that would, like himself, fabricate when I had motive, and fabri- 



27 



eate without motive. I wrote to Mr. Clay, supposing it possible that he atigbt 
recollect our interview at the burial, and as a commentary upon these certifiers, 
E, Warfield, Breckinridge and Marshall, I give the reader his letter: 

Jacksonville, September 28, 1841. 
Bear Sir*. ■ ' 

I received yours of the inst., inquiring whether I recollected the circumstance of your being 

present at the burial of the Hon. John Breckinridge. I regret very much that I cannot answer your 
request satisfactorily to you. I shall never forget the clas* of feelings which pervad«d the minds of 
every body of that occasion, and especially my own. Sorrow had filled my heart to overflowing, 
when the death of that great and good man was announced in Lexington, and the whole country 
was in mourning upon that occasion, I well remember the solemnity that hung upon the countenance 
of all those that were present at his burial. But at this late day, I could not certainly say, that I 
recollected a single individual present, I have tried to call to mind the persons you mentioned at 
being there, but I cannot. I remember the eircumstance of the corpse being taken from the house te- 
the garden, but who were the pall bearers I do not now recollect. 

With sentiment of great respect, I am sir, your obedient servant, 

PORTER CLAY. 

The next effort of this worthy son of the Church, is to get Benj. Warfield and com- 
pany to certify that in a speech I made before the court house door, I stated that I never 
•charged his father's executors any thing for my professional services. Out of the thou- 
sands that heard me, the gentleman has eight of his partisans, and the most bitter and 
vindictive enemies 1 have upon earth, for his certifiers. They chiefly constitute the 
gentry that groomed the gentleman on the day he appeared, rigged out with a new set 
of China Teeth, by the Providence of God, to commence his tirade at the court house. 
You have seen, gentle reader, on the race field, a jockey, cap in hand, lead up his nag to 
the polls, when a parcel of lacqnies stood at a distance, one bearing the horse's blanket, 
another a sheaf of straw, and a third a bottle of water — imagine all this, and you hav« 
the gentleman and his tribe of certifiers. 

After filling his stomach with beef and wine, at , and saying to him- 
self, a full belly makes a strong back, he made his appearance, with a mouthful of earth- 
enware teeth, led to the stand by his certifier, T. Redd, and the major part of the balance 
of the certificate gentry waddling after him, with his trunks and stores of libels, who 
then paired off, some to wait the beck and call of the orator, and others to stand off and 
laugh when he uttered his witty waggeries, and others to teach the bystanders how to 
listen and understand. These are the gentry that are made to say that they distinctly 
understood me to say that I had 'never put pen to paper to charge your father's heir* 
one cent.' Notice that these gentlemen certifiers make me say I 'never put pen to pa- 
per to eharge Mr. Breckinridge's heirs one cent.' Now, if this certificate is made to 
apply to his heirs, as it expresses, (although I verily believe I never used the express- 
ions imputed, nor any like them,) it is literally true that although I rendered his children 
valuable services, I never did, as I believe, put pen to paper to charge them, individu- 
ally, one cent; but if they meant to apply these statements to business I did for the 
Administrators of John Breckinridge as the reverend gentleman insinuates, then the 
certificate is utterly false. I wrote out my speech as soon as I could write it, and left it 
with the printer, not dreaming that a being existed that misapprehended what I had said 
in relation to my services for John Breckinridge's administrators, and what I had done 
for his children individually; and I verily believe that I gave, in my written speech, the 
substance of every thing I did say, and, as nearly as I could, pursued what I said, liter- 
ally, about my services for the administrators. In page 12, I say, 'Fellow citizens, I 
have only adverted to the prominent services rendered to the estate of the gentleman's 
father. While his children were in infancy, unable to help themselves, I performed 
other and numerous services for them; 1 performed the duties of agent, attorney, pay- 
master and friend, caused witnesses to be summoned and surveys to be made, and for the 
family, advanced the fees when called on; for all which, I never asked or 
presented a fee bill until 1 argued the last suit, and then did not charge for all I did, 
what would have been charged by many lawyers, for the single case of, Ross . & CarneaA. 



28 



against Preston & Breckinridge, a part of which was paid in a most iniquitous demand 
on my brother, which the reverend gentleman coerced, of the injustice of which he was 
fully notified.' Now, how is it possible that I could have said I never charged any 
thing, and say I only charged, for all I did, what ought to have been charged for Ross& 
Carneal against Preston &d Breckinridge, and that a part of the account was paid by an 
iniquitous claim on my brother'? Here I say thus much for the manner in which 1 have 
acted towards the gentleman's father's estate, and how I have acted towards his children. 
I then go on to state a most onorous duty I performed for the reverend gentleman's sister, 
Letitia, and her slaves, for which I say I have never received one cent, and the gentleman 
knows I never will take one farthing. In page 13, I say, "when some of the Fayette 
lawyers, to whom you refer, &c, attempted to seize the interest of your brother Cabell's 
heirs in the dower estate, to whom did you apply] To me, sir — and you know how well 
I served them, &c; and for this, sir, you equally know that I never took,[and never will 
take one farthing." Now it is possible that some of these certifiers have not drawn a 
distinction between the services which 1 performed for Letitia and for Cabell Breckin- 
ridge's heirs (for which I said I had never charged any thing) and the services I had 
rendered for the administrators, for which 1 had charged the moderate fees I did charge 1 ? 
The certifiers may take their choice between mistake and misrepresentation. I accord 
to them a possible mistake; but it seems strange that none but my bitter enemies so un- 
derstood me. 1 except from this remark, Mr. David A. Sayre, who has no doubt, heard 
my remarks about Cabell Breckinridge's heirs, and the reverend preacher has got him to 
become special endorser for his eight willing souls, whose certificate he infamously 
means the reader to apply to the observations I made about the business I did for the ad- 
ministrators. 

Another most impudent fraud is attempted to be palmed upon the public by the gentle- 
man, in pretending that he has no recollection that I was his security to the late Andrew 
F. Price, that he and the other heirs of John Lee, should be paid in twelve months from 
the date of the bond, which bore date about the time the execution was issued, but 
which was not. placed in the hands of the Sheriff, in consequence of my being security, 
that the debt should be paid. This bond was given in the early part of 1827, 1 think, 
as collateral security, to the executors of Lee, that their judgment against Mr. 
Breckinridge's administrators should be paid in twelve months, was signed by the gen- 
tleman and by myself, as his security, handed to him, and by him to Price, one of the 
heirs of Lee, and agent for the rest and the executors. At the end of the year as I 
stated in my speech, the reverend gentleman, out of near eight thousand dollars, had 
paid but $1000, when Price and the gentleman both called on me, and got my endorse- 
ment on the bond as well as I recollect, that I would take no exceptions to any indulgence 
as to the time Mr. Price might please to accord to the gentleman, and after that, Price 
indulged him from time to time, until I put the reverend slanderer into possession of 
funds through Ormsby's judgment, to pay Price's judgment off, when no doubt he lifted 
our bond, and has it at this very moment as a voucher against his father's estate. When 
the gentleman first informed me that Price had taken out execution, and would proceed 
unless he got security that the debt should be paid in twelve months, and required of him 
either John IV. Hunt, John Brand, or myself, he remarked, I can get neither of 
them; he did not say he had applied to either of them, nor did I ever say that he said so, 
'or that he ever applied to them. He knew, himself, both these men too well to apply to 
either of them, and so did I know them, and him, too well (impudent as he was) to 
either say or believe he had ever applied to them to be his security for eight thousand 
dollars. But to impose upon the world a belief, that I had said he had applied to them, 
he parades their letters, stating that he had never asked them to be his securities— Price 
lived in Lexington, and died there in 1833; his wife was adm'rx., but removed from 
Lexington, and 1 learn is also dead, and where Price's papers are, I know not. The 
gentleman, shortly after I detected him in a piece of fraud, which I shall hereafter 



99 



explain, left Lexington, and the State, without ever giving me any voucher from Price, 
that my bond was cancelled. This, with some other conduct equally base, drew from 
me my letter of August, 1832, of which he makes an extract in page 29 of his book, 
where he says: 

"Speaking of these same transactions, in your letter of August 29, 1832, page 27, you use the fol- 
lowing language: 'You never asked me what was my account of 23 years standing. Nor have you, 
to this day, given me any evidence that my note, as you r security, has been paid.' " 

This note is the one given to Price, so stated in the letter. Now, let me ask all who 
know me, and who knew Price, and the gentleman, if it is likely that in 1832, when 
Price was alive, in perfect health, and my neighbor, I would have pretended that I had 
gone security for the reverend gentleman, when in fact I had not! From 1832 to 
1841, the gentleman never thought of denying my securityship, but when he returns 
back to Kentucky, in 1841, and finds Price and his administrator dead, and presumes 
me ignorant, as I am, where his papers are, he ventures an infamous falsehood, in say- 
ing or insinuating that I was never his security. He had the joint note, and left the 
country, as my letter brands him, without leaving with me any voucher that he had ta- 
ken it up; and then, when he presumes I cannot detect him, brazens the falsehood, and 
to sustain himself, states that the judgment against the administrators of his father was 
good, and that independent of that, Price was his friend, and asked no securities. Now, 
reader, how stand these facts'? Why, that in point of law, Price's judgment was 
only against the Executors, when assets accrued; they had for twenty years, or nearly 
that time, distributed every cent of assets; the heirs of Breckinridge were not parties, 
and the only possible remedy left Price to ever enforce the debt, was by an action for 
a devastavit against Breckinridge's Administrators, or a dilatory suit in chancery 
against the heirs of Breckinridge. Does any man living believe that Andrew F. Price 
would trust Robert J. Breckinridge for more than three whole years, without security, 
for eight thousand dollars, when he knew that the said Robert was a notorious gambler 
and spendthrift, who had run thorugh much of what he received from his father, and 
when, I believe, he had not plundered quite through his Brasdalbane affair with his aunt? 
Those who knew Price, would smile at the falsehoods Mr. Breckinridge utters on that 
point. While the gentleman is asking of Mr. Hunt and Mr. Brand, impertinently, if 
he asked them to be his security, let him ask either of those gentlemen, or any other 
man that knew Andrew F. Price and Mr. Breckiuridge, in 1827, if they believe Mr. 
Price would trust him for $8,000, for three years, without security; and if any such 
will answer yes, I will acknowledge that I have done the gentleman an injury, in saying 
as I do, from a perfect knowledge of Price, that I do not believe he would have trust- 
ed him as an agent to carry eight thousand dollars from Lexington to Louisville. I 
knew Price for nearly forty years, and for nearly thirty years before his death, was his 
lawyer, and have adjusted accounts with him to the amount of thousands, and 1 never 
had a firmer friend nor a better client. He was exact and correct, not only in his ac- 
counts, but with those to whom he confided his funds, and never did he trust such a hu- 
man being as the reverend gentleman was, without good security; and that he had, as 
he thought, in me. Price told me, at the end of the year, that Breckinridge had only 
paid a thousand dollars. I stated in my speech that he had at the end of the year, 
paid one thousand dollars, and David Castleman, his certifier, puts down in the account 
exhibited, precisely that sum paid the first year. 

But the gentleman has again need for his certifying school-master, Dr. Marshall. 
The Doctor says: "You ask me to state what attention Mr. Robert Wickliffe, Sr., paid 
you, when sick. I staid with you 02 days, never having left but twice, for very short 
intervals, (each time not exceeding one hour,) except for my meals, and then Mr. Wick- 
liffe was at the table with me. During this time, Mr. W. never was in your room, nor 
ever sent any inquiry for you, as far as came to my knowledge. When I left the town, 
as stated, I left your brother William to stay with you until my return. After the ad- 



30 



journment of the House, I staid in your room until you removed, when I brought you 
home." Very well, Dr. Marshall! You know, of a certainty, do you, that you were 
62 days in Mr. Breckinridge's room, never absent but twice, when you left his brother 
William with him, and was not absent more than an hour each time, except to your 
meals, where you found me? That is, you recollect that you were at the table with me 
one hundred and eighty-six times! And why, pray Doctor, were you so particular as 
to know so distinctly, as to say I was at the table when you took your meals'? And do 
you mean to say, of your own certain knowledge and recollention, that for 62 days, (two 
hours excepted) you never left Mr. Breckinridge's room, except to go to your meal*, 
when I was always with you? Here Doctor, I leave you to the reader's criticism. After 
Porter Clay's and Dr. MunselPs letters, which I present you a sight of, I am willing to 
allow an old man to forget a great deal; but he should take care and not recollect too 
much. 

And now gentle reader, having before disposed of the Dr.'s nursery story, I will give 
you what I hope will dispose of this story also. I will now show you how both Mr. Breck- 
inridge and the Doctor have evaded the real issue of veracity between Breckinridge and 
myself, by bringing this impertinent statement of the Doctor's, about his sticking fast to 
Mr. Breckinridge's room for 62 days, together, never, oh never having been out of it, 
save to take his meals with myself, at the private table! 

In page 14 of my speech I say that I was informed that he (Breckinridge) was nightly 
engaged in the ruinous habit of gambling. I lost no time in warning him of the certain 
destruction to his prospects in life, unless he desisted. He promised fair, but that was all, 
for he still kept up his habits, until late in the session of 1828, (I think) a mutual friend 
disclosed to me, that he was ruining himself at Faro, and other games of chance, and 
had on the night before lost enormously. About the time I expected him to repair again 
to his sinks of ruin and infamy, I went to his lodging room, and found him in the act of 
rising from his bed, to accompany some of his companions then in attendance for his com- 
pany, to commence Faro. His guests soon disappeared, and he threw himself into his 
bed again, pretending to be very sick; after speaking to him privately, not to leave his 
room that night, and obtaining a promise that he would not, I left him for the night, as I 
hoped to sleep off the desperation his countenatce portrayed, but I learnt afterwards, that 
the gentleman, instead of going to sleep to ease his mind, took a quantity of calomel, 
without weight or measure, having no more effectual remedy at command, and was found 
prostrate the next morning. On this subject I give you the following letter from Presley 
Davis, Esq.: 

October 25th » 1841. 

Mr. WlCKLIFFE: 

I received yeur letter by your brother, C. A. Wickliffe, on the subject of a conversation I had 
with the late Henry Trittenden, with regard to Robert J. Breckinridge, during the time of His service 
as a member of the Legislature from Fayette. I heard Henry Crittenden say that Breckinridge had 
lost a large sum of money at gambling and in a short time after the conversation, Mr. C. told nrs« of 
the very dangerous situation of Mr. Breckinridge, having a violent attack of fever. I have taken 
some trouble to get the time and dates, but my recollection does not serve me, and I could not tee 
those persons who could have given me information on this subject. 

Yours, truly, 

P. DAVIS. 

I learnt further, that the local physicians proving unable to give him relief, he called in 
Dr. Marshall, who, with the aid of Dr.Munsell, with hot bath and steam battery, brought 
the calomel from him in witches balls, and saved his life. During the awful suspense in 
which his fate was in the hands of his physicians I remained near him, and no man living- 
could feel more relieved than I did, when Dr. Marshall exhibited to me the balls of calo- 
mel which the steam battery had forced through his stomach, and announced to me his 
hopes of saving his life. It was to contradict this statement that Dr. Marshall's certifi- 
cate was paraded. I had said that he took calomel himself, without weight or measure. 
Dare Dr. Marshall deny that! If he had done so, 1 would make him, the Doctor, answer 



31 



tfbf his pupils teeth that dropped from his head, and for bringing to the brink of the gravs? 
by the inordinate use of calomel, his favorite. I stated that I remained near the 
reverend gentleman while his life was believed to be in the hands of his physicians. 
Why did not the Doctor certify that I was not near him) This would contradict me; 
but, oh no, the voice of a whole town, tavern and senate, would then contradict him. 
Well, why did he not deny that the steam battery brought from his pupil the calomel he 
had swallowed! Doctor Munsell and others would then be in the way. Why not deny 
that the steam battery had brought forih two balls, and that he shewed them to me! In- 
stead of saying I sent no message from the breakfast or dining table to his precious 
pupil, for 62 days, he himself is my witness, although I don't admit the fact, that for 
62 days I was his shadow at the table within the same house, with his pupil. 1 will 
now, reader, only say, would to God that all Dr. Marshall has said about my indifference 
to the fate of the reverend slanderer, were true to the letter. If I have one mortification 
upon this earth, which I must shortly leave, greater than any other, it is that while I 
knew Robert J. Breckinridge to be essentially selfish and brutish in his feelings, and 
wholly destitute of principle, I took a deep interest in his welfare, and ustd uncommon 
efforts not only to sustain him, but to reform him. Could the Doctor not only certify, 
but swear,, that I never saw his pupil with my eyes, and tell the truth, he does not know 
what a load he would take from my conscience; but this would have been as wide of fact 
as what he has stated. 

I wish the reader to understand that my speech was made without preparation and 
without knowing to what I had to respond, until the reverend gentleman let off his 
venom at the court house; that 1 referred to facts, mostly from ten to forty years stand- 
ing and* that of course, when I spoke from memory, I gave, and attempted to give but 
impressions on the mind. As for instance, when I say towards the last of the session of 
1828, (I say I think) I was informed of the gentleman's feats at Faro, and yet I shall 
be greatly deceived if I am found to have varied from the fact in one single instance, 
and if I have not shown in every case, where a paper or record will decide that I 
have been accurate to the letter. I wish further, that the reader will understand 
that I have not stated that the gentleman was sick when I saw him at his room, 
but the contrary, that I believed he feigned sickness; that 1 did not say that he, 
after I left him, swallowed calomel, and was found next morning prostrate; but that 
I was so told or informed of Mr. Breckinridge's taking the calomel, and being pros- 
trated the next morning. I received the whole story from this identical Doctor 
Marshall, and no other person whatever. 

It was sometime in the middle of the week when I paid the visit to Robert J. 
Breckinridge at his room, as stated in my speech. I had been mostly confined in Frank- 
fort from home, attending the courts, and then the Legislature, and sometimes both 
together, from the first of October. I had been, from the commencement of the 
eession, in a struggle in the Senate, first to save Judges Owsley and Mills, who 
had imprudently resigned, and were re-nominated by the Governor; both of whom, 
in spite of my labors, had been rejected by the Senate, on the vote of Col. Mason, 
the sitting member from Montgomery. The Governor had made numerous nomina- 
tions, all of whom, except Chief Justice Robertson and Justice Underwood had 
gone the same way that the old Judges went. In the Senate the struggle to save 
Robertson and Underwood, particularly Robertson, had been a severe one, in which 
I separated from a most efficient friend and relative. But I had at last got the 
court organized; they met, adjourned, &c. when we took up the contested election 
for the Senator of Montgomery, between the sitting member Col. Mason, and the 
contestor, General Williams, on the event of which, depended the majority in the 
Senate. I had this contest on my hands, besides the duty of a Senator, and chair- 
man of the committee of Courts of Justice. These left me little time, as well as 
memory «erv$s me, to see my family until the Saturday after I had the interview 



32 



with Mr. Robert J. Breckinridge. On Saturday, I left Frankfort for Lexington, with- 
out hearing or knowing that Breckinridge was not well, and I am now of opinion that 
he was both well, and, when not at Faro, doing well. On Tuesday, I returned with 
Mrs. Wickliffe after dark, when I was, for the first time, informed that Bob Breckinridge 
was dangerously ill, and was attended by Dr. Marshall, who had prostrated him with 
calomel, &c. &c As soon after supper as 1 had suitable rooms provided for Mrs. Wick- 
liffe, 1 set out to see the reverend gentleman, went to the old frame house where I left 
him the night I last saw him; the door was shut, and I could get no entrance. I returned 
to the tavern, told Mrs. Weislger that I could not get into Mr. Breckinridge's room, who 
then informed me that he had been removed to a room (I well knew) over the small draw- 
ing room. I stept up stairs, found no one with him but this identical Dr. Marshall — 
was informed by the Preacher that he was not well, and I saw he was in considerable 
pain. I asked Marshall in a low voice, and aside from his patient, what ailed him. He 
stated not much — that he had taken cold, and to relieve himself he had taken an over 
quantity of calomel, and when he called on physicians, they, instead of giving him 
physic to work the calomel off, had given him more calomel, until his bowels had become 
prostrated; but that he was about to adopt a course which he thought would soon relieve 
him. I replied then, you have given him no calomel? Not a grain, said he. I felt 
greatly relieved at this news, for I then had the kindest feelings for Dr. Marshall and 
never suspected that I had an enemy in him. 1 believed him to be a talented and kind 
physician, but I knew, and the world knows, what had been said of his immoderate use 
of calomel, and particularly in the cases of the brother and sister of his pupil, Robert J. 
Breckinridge. I stated to the Doctor that as to my time, 1 was entirely occupied, that 
I had arrived with my wife and servants, but that if I could be of any service, particu- 
larly if funds were wanting, to let me know it. He said that I would not be needed, 
that Dr. Munsell was associated with him, and had only gone home, but would return- 
directly, and they two, with a negro to attend on them, would be all that was needed- 
I returned to my wife, stated that Doctor Marshall was not the cause of Breckinridge's 
condition — that the Doctor had given him no calomel, but that he was prostrated by cal- 
omel taken by himself, and administered to him before Marshall was called in, and re- 
quested her to contradict the report, by stating the facts to Mrs. Weisiger, which, I 
know she did . 

I saw no body but Marshall in the room, until Munsell stepped in, nor have I any 
recollection of ever seeing William Breckinridge or Castleman until Dr. Munsell saved 
the life of the slanderer, by galvanizing him. Although J was incessantly engaged 
with public business night and day, I think I did not let a day pass without not only being 
in the room, but seeing the pretty face of the Doctor's pupil. My wife has the most dis- 
tinct recollection that I did every day report his condition to her, until 1 told her that I did 
not think Marshall would relieve him, and that he must die; when, as Capt. Weisiger 
was in a dying condition in the other end of the house, she proposed to leave Frankfort, 
and as I expected the rever'd gentleman not to survive three days, with her advice I re- 
mained, and did what I never have done before or since — sent my wife home with no 
escort except her servants. This was on Saturday, and on the Sunday night following, 
I wrote her a letter, of which the following is a true extract: 

September 28, 1841. 

The following extracts were made by me from two old letters in the handwriting of Robert Wick- 
liffe, addressed to Mrs. Wickliffe, handed to me by her, and which are now before me. 

WILLIAM FRESTON. 

Robert Wickliffe, Sr. 

Frankfort, Sunday night. 
***** "Has my wife safely arrived at home without alarm, and has she found 
all as she hoped." 

"I went to church and heard Mr. Edgar preach a most excellent sermon. He is certainly a most 
accomplished orator. Dr. Marshall went with me, and is still here with Robert Breckinridge, who 
is no better. Old Capt. Weisiger is still growing worse. We had a sharp discussion yesterday on. 
the ncfflatnation of Robertson and Underwood, &c, &c. 



33 



"SATURDAY NIGHT, It o'clock. » * * My health has be«n as usual.— Poor Breck- 
inridge still hangs over the brink of the grave, and Capt. Weisiger is gradually sinking. The Legis- 
lature is progressing slowly. An unusual portion of the business devolves on me as Chairman of the 
Committee of Courts ol Justice. The contested etection still hangs over us, and is made the order 
ci the dey (or Monday next, &c. &c." 

Through the course of the week, my recollection does not serve me to speak, except 
that at one time I think I urged that his brother William should be sent for, and that the 
certifying- Doctor told me he had been written to, and that I urged lhat a special mes- 
senger should be instantly despatched. Of this, I speak doubtingly. On Saturday 
night, I entered the room, and found no one in it but Marshall, who informed me that 
Munsell had stepped out. I saw, according to my best belief, neither brother William, 
brother Davy, or any other brother there. I thought that he was evidently sinking, and 
when I retired to my room, I wrote a letter to my wife, of which the foregoing is a 
faithful extract. 

On the next morning early, I met Dr. Marshall in Weisiger's bar room, (not at his 
meals) when he, in an under tone, informed me that he had abandoned all hope and that 
his patient must die; that he could not survive longer than 4 o'clock of that day. As I 
had an opportunity of writing to Lexington by some one just starting, I wrote again to 
my wife that Doctor Marshall had informed me that poor Breckinridge (yes, poor fellow,) 
must die; that he could not survive longer than 4 o'clock of that da\ ; and added that I 
presumed he would be interred at Cabell's Dale, about Wednesday, but on that subject I 
would write again. Of the receipt of this letter, my family (particularly my youngest 
daughter,) have a perfect recollection, but as yet it cannot be found. But, before I progress, 
reader, do you not believe when I wrote thirteen years ago, at 1 1 o'clock at night, to my 
Wife, a private letter, that this same Doctor Marshall had spent that day with me in 
hearing a sermon from the Rev. Mr. Edgar, that this teacher of Robert Jefferson Breck- 
inridge really is a little wide of the mark when he says he never left his pupil, except to 
take his meals with me, twice, not one hour at each time. Again, that 1 should play his 
shadow for sixt\-two days, and that he should always know, when he left his pupil, that 
William, another certifier, was in the room, so that between them they could, in 1841, 
certify most positively and certainly, that I was never in his room, in 1828, is pretty 
smart, I admit, but nothing to the fact that he and me should, substance and shadow, eat 
in Weisiger's dining room, 186 meals, just at the foot of the stairs that led to the 
death-like chamber where lay stretched on a sick bed, his pupil, his children's cousin, 
and who was my children's cousin, and had married my children's cousin, and who was 
my neighbor, my countymnn, and my representative, and between whom and me there 
never had been one unkind word, but who, and whose wife, had ever been received with- 
in my doors with a kindness next to that extended to my own children — and yet, neither 
the Doctor nor myself ever named to each other this said R. J. Breckinridge! Is not 
this passing strange, reader? But I will give you stranger things for the Doctor to for- 
get yet. Precisely at 4 o'clock of the day, by my watch, I went into the room, expect- 
ing to see Mr. Breckinridge dead or expiring. When I entered, I found Marshall and 
Munsell, as I thought, washing his limbs for the shroud; but, on approaching them, I 
discovered that he was breathing, and that they were giving him a warm bath. As soon 
as he was taken out of the bath, the Doctor neared me and said, "At fouroVock, 1 found 
that he breathed better than he did in the morning, and Dr. Munsell has suggested the 
galvanic battery. It is a Yankee cure, and may do good; if it does not, he must die; and, 
if you will be seated, you will see the experiment.'' I sat down, and saw Munsell give 
him the first shock, with no perceptible effect. Fie charged, and gave him a second, 
when I saw him move, and Munsell stated he heard a rumbling in the intestines. 
About this, Marshall and he disagreed. Munsell gave him a third, when I not only 
saw Breckinridge start at the shock, but both Munsell and Marshall stated that they 
heard an action on hi3 bowels. I then left, but was at the door at day light next morn- 



5 



34 



ing, when 1 found it closed and all still inside. At dinner, however, Marshall told me 
he had hopes of Breckinridge's life; that the battery had forced a passage. On the night 
before, while Munsell was preparing the battery, Marshall told me that if ever the cal- 
omel was extracted, it would be in the condition of a witches ball taken from the maw 
of a cow; that it had been, upon the same principle, wound into a ball by the action of 
the stomach. 

After the adjournment of the Senate, I visited the Doctor nnd his pupil again. I 
found the pupil much exhausted, but lying apparently easy. Munsell was in the room, 
when the Doctor reminded me that he had told me last night, that if ever the calomel 
was extracted, it would come from him in a ball, but, said he, 'it has come from him in 
two balls.' 1 desired to see them, when, cleaning one, of the mucus adhering to it, he 
handed it to me. It was, in size and substance, like a hard boiled yolk of a pullet's egg. 
I asked for the other. He stated that that broke and crumbled in its passage, but handed 
me a piece of white paper in which he had preserved it. 'Now,' said the Doctor, 'the 
hard round ball is what Bob took himself; his stomach was strong, and wound it into the 
hard round ball you see, and the crumbles in the paper is what his physicians gave him, 
his stomach being too weak to wind the ball hard.' While all I saw satisfied me that, 
but for Munsell, Breckinridge must still die, Doctor Marshall's whole conduct raised him, 
thus far, in my estimation; but when I congratulated him upon the prospect of saving 
Breckinridge's life, he, with some concern, in a whisper, told me he must leave him — 
that he had just got a letler from his wife, stating that one of his children was likely to 
die. I could only express my regret in such an extreme case, and sny that I feared if 
he went, Breckinridge must die. I stayed a short time, saw no preparation for a start 
by the Doctor, and retired; and as I learned every day that Breckinridge was getting 
better, and crowds of friends came to the rescue after he was relieved — among them his 
brother — I don't recollect that I ever entered the room again, or saw the reverend gen- 
tleman, except on the day he took his start for home, when he sent for me into Weisiger's 
drawing room, as he informed me, to speak with me about the Ormsby suit. And this 
man has taken Marshall's statement to prove my utter indifference for his fate, when he 
knows that after he joined his wife, and I had reached home, he came with his wife and 
children to visit me, leaving his carriage and servants at my house, while himself and 
family visited his other friends throughout the city, for several days. If I had neglected 
him thus, why visit me and my family, and, as an evidence of his confidence and affec- 
tion, single me and my family out as the first to receive the honor of a visit! Reader, 
because his whole story is a fabrication. He believed that I felt great interest in him, 
with all his faults, and he knew that I was his friend and the friend of his whole family. 
Seeing the Doctor's sixty-two days certificate, and knowing that Dr. Munsell was 
present at the battery and the exhibition of the balls, I wrote him the following letter 
and received an answer, both of which I will trouble the reader to read, as well as so 
much of Judge Woolley's letter as bears on the Doctor's certificate: 

Lexington, August 28th, 1841. 

Dr. L. Munsell: 

Dear Sir— A publication of the Rev. R. J. Breckinridge, denying that 1 was ever in his roora 
during his illness in the winter of 1828, accompanied with a statement of Dr. Louis Marshall to the 
same effect, renders this appeal to you, to know of you if your memory serves in relation to my 
presence once or twice while you were in attendance. And that you may better recollect, I will call 
to your memory facts and circumstances which I trust have not escaped your memory, if my being 
several times in the room has. If you remember, that after Mr, Breckimidge was removed from the 
old frame house where he was taken ill, Marshall and yourself were called in place of the physicians 
first attending him. 1 called after dark, where I found you and Dr. Marshall alone in the room, ex- 
cept Mr. Weisiger's servant, where, after the usual enquiries of the health of the patient, Dr. Mar- 
shall in a low voice, explained to me the cause of his illness, as followeth: That he had taken cold, 
and feeling unwell, had himself taken calomel, and his physicians, instead of working off what 
physic he had taken had added to it, until his, stomach had become prostrated, and that owing to the 
obstruction caused by the mercury, his case was a serious one. That if the mercury could be extracted 
from him, he thought it would come out in balls, &e. That or. the next day or two after, no relief being 
%ne», yea both despaired of big life. That in this state of the esse, you suggested 'bathing and the 



35 



galvanic battery . That while you were bathing him I entered the room, and whila I stayed yo« 

elied as many as three shocks. That I visited you the next night when your patient wan relieved, tb« 
attery having brought from him two balls of mercury, one of which Dr. Marshall exhibited whol«« 
the other wis broken, which he showed i n a piece of paper, you were present, but Marshall held the 
balls and conversed with me, while you were, engaged with the patient. I trust that your memory 
will enable you to speak of ny piesence and other facts I have stated. 

I wish alio to call to your recollection, that. Marshall informed me that he had, on the night of the 
last visit I speak of, received a note from his wife informing him that one of his children was very 
ill, and like to die. and whether I did not urge him to remain with Breckini idge, as his life depended 
on his presence, and the fate of his child would, in all probability, be decided before he could reach 
home. I trust to our former acquaintance and the kindness of your temper for makingth'i3 request of 
you. I hope you will give me any information of my presence and conversation with you during your 
attendance on Mr, Breckinridge, at as early a day as your convenience will allow, and greatly oblige 

Your obedient servant, 

R. WICKLIFFE. 
Indianapolis, September 16, 1841. 

R. WICKLIFFE, Esq.: 

Dear Sir — I received your letter of the2sth ult. and have maturely considered its contents. 

Upon an occurrence which transpired 12 or 13 years ago, and the particulars of which were, ia 
their nature, but little calculated to make a lasting impression upon my mind, it can hardly be ex« 
that ! sheuld speak with much certainty. 

1 well recollect that I was called upon to attend Mr. Breckinridge, in connection with Dr. Marshall, 
that it was in the winter, and during the session of the Legislature; and that his room was frequently 
crowded with his acquaintances who came to visit him. But, with regard to individuals, except his 
brother William, John C. Young and David Castleman, my memory entirely fails me. 

I have adistinct recollection of the "facts and circumstances" which you call to my memory, and 
which you have in the main, correctly stated ; but whether Dr. Marshall "received a note from his 
wife informing him of the illness of one of his children," I am entirely ignorant. 

I have endeavored to tax my memory severely, in order that I might give you the molt satisfactory 
answer to your enquiries, but the foregoing is all that I fee! authorized to state with certainty. 

I am, dear sir, very respectfully, yours, &c. 

L. MUNSELL. 



Lexington, November, 1341. 

Dear Sir-. 

In my former letter I answered so much as I then supposed was desired by you. I had not seeu 
your reply to Mr. Breckinridge, and did not know how far to respond. Having been informed by 
you fcince, that a reference is made to me upon other points, I proceed to give you my best recollec- 
tion upon them. 1 was in Frankfort when Mr. B. was taken sick, and left the next day for this place. 
I returned on a Monday, some time after, and arrived at your room in Frankfart, a short time before 
dinner. You informed me that Mr. Breckinridge was dangerously ill, and apprehended that he must 
die; that you had seen him the evening before, and gave other reasons which I deem unnecessary to 
mention. I expressed a desire to see him. You informed me of the room in which I could find, him, 
(for that had been changed,) and that you would go with me. We were about to leave, when a 
gentleman, who, I believe, to have been Col. Flemming met us, and stopped you. I proceeded, and 
opposite the private doorof Mr. Weisiger, I met Dr. Marshall, I enquired how Mr. Breckinridge was, 
and if I could get to see him; and received from the Doctor the respon se, that he thought him better, 
and that I was at liberty to visit him. I went to the room, and after conversing a few minutes, you 
came in. We remained a short time, and both left, 1 believe for dinner. 

After the dec9ion of the case of Breckinridge and Ormsby, I had a conversation with Mr. B., in 
which he stated that you had been counsel for his father's estate, for a great many years, and had 
rendered it important services, and expressed his obligations for them. That although you had not 
succeeded in the suit of Lee's executors, against the estate, you had by your professional labor and 
ability, procrastinated the decision, until you obtained the decree against Ormsby, out of which the 
estate would be enabled to pay Lee'sjudgment, thereby preventing a sacrffice of property. He said 
the estate owed you an account of long standing, the amount he did not know, and that he never had 
any settlement with you. Mr. Breckinridge at other times, before he became unfriendly to you, ex- 
pressed gratelul feeliugs towards you, for your friendship and attention to the heirs of his father's 
estate. Yeurs, &c 

A. K. WOOLLEY. 



Letter from General Robert B. McAfee, Ex-Lieutenant Governor and Speaker of 
the Senate of Kentucky, received since this publication appeared in the Obser- 
ver and Reporter: 

Harrodsburgh, December 24, 1841. 

Dear Sir: 

I have received your letter, in relation to having seen you in Mr. Robt. J. Breckinridge's room, 
while he was a member of the Kentucky Legislature. I can only say, that I called twice to see Mr. 
Breckinridge during the session. The first time he had company, and I remained but a few moments, 



36 



the second time I called to see him, 1 found him in bed sick, there was no person present but a ser- 
vant, and in a few minutes after, you came in and enquired how he was. You took a seat by his bed 
and finding that he did not wish to converse, I immediately retired, leaving you in his room, I did 
not hear any farther remarks, and I cannot say what passed between you, or howlongyou remained. 

Yours, with high respect, 

ROB'T. B. McAFEE. 

Here is the statement of a highly respectable gentleman, added to that of Judge 
Woolley, and my own letters, written to my family from Frankfort, while Mr. Breckin- 
ridge was believed to be dangerously ill, positively disproving his statements that I 
never was in his room, or paid him the least attention during the whole time of his ill- 
ness. The reader will, no doubt, ask what could have possessed Mr. Breckinridge to 
have exposed himself in this particular, as well as others, to a conviction of wilful false- 
hood, I answer as I have done before — being moved and instigated by the devil, — he 
has done it, and is ready to do what he has done, again. Little does he care if I prove 
that he has uttered a falsenood. He, no doubt, laughs that I have put myself to the 
trouble, and been fool enough to do it. Mr. Breckinridge is like a professional gentle- 
man I once knew, who, when told by his client that he was "a liar and a cheat," replied, 
"What of that — why not tell me of something I don't know." 

The next impudent attempt of the reverend slanderer is his statement of a palpable 
falsehood in saying that I did not argue the case of Breckinridge and Ormsby, and in 
further stating that Chief Justice Robertson and Mr. Chinn authorized him to say that I 
had not argued the case. Judge Robertson authorizes me to say that the statement of 
the reverend slanderer is, as to him, gratuitous, and I learn that Mr Chinn makes the 
same remarks. It appears to be a trick of the gentleman to vouch high names for his 
falsehoods. He vouches in like manner Mr. Charles Carr, to prove that 1 never render- 
ed the most painful services which 1 stated I did, for his sister Letitia. Mr. Carr never 
stated any such thing, but the contrary. When two of the gentleman's certifiers, Benj. 
Warfield and David Castleman, applied to him to give them a certificate, he assures me 
that he told them that so far from my not rendering the service, he thought I had done 
more than my duty, for he thought 1 had obtained for Mrs. Grayson unjust verdicts; thai 
he did not press his execution until he got his debt, but that after waiting sometime, 
Gen. Robert Breckinridge, Alfred Grayson's trustee, paid him. And yet the reader will 
see what a pretty tale the reverend gentleman has manufactured out of what Mr. Carr 
has said. Charles Carr is your neighbor and countyman, and I refer to him, as I do to 
Judge Robertson, to contradict the slanderer; and herewith present his letter: 

November 1st, 1841. 

DEAR Sir: — In answer to the interrogatories put to me some daysagc by yon, mj impressions are; 
First, That you did some thirty years ago, appear as the counsel for Mrs. Grayson, in which her 
negroes were taken in execution forher husbands debts. Secondly, That you did succeed in all the 
cases before the Jury. Thirdly, That the Jury did not finish until about 11 o'clock at night, one of 
the coldest nights, with the worst roads that I ever remember to have ridden from Lexidgton to my 
house. 

C. CARR. 

ROBT. WlCKLIFFE, SR. 

The gentleman has, in connection with his slander about the Ormsby case, committed 
a little slight of hand on my speech, so as to make Judge Oldham's certificate mean 
something. In speaking of the gentleman's losing confidence in the counsel he had a- 
greed with me should aid Judge Woolley, in page 11. I say, 'When the day of trial 
came near, my present slanderer and persecutor had confidence in me alone.' In page 
18, of his book, the preacher makes me say, not, when the day of trial came near, but 
when the day of trial came on, and then states that when the day of trial came on, he 
was sick, &c. When the trial came on, I believe that he was so far recovered that he 
could not only have discoursed about the case, but have attended the trial; and be.'ore the 
court had taken a recess — indeed before the old Judges were rejected., the suit was ap- 
proaching a trial, when the gentleman objected to trusting the case, as we agreed, to 



37 

Chinn's argument, and forced me into the argument. Time was necessary and existed 
sufficient to prepare lor the trial. And, to practice this little artifice upon the public the 
reverend saint p.ous y alters the word n EAE into the word on. To prove that the gen- 
tleman has been guiity of fabncation in this whole story, I here present the reader with 
a copy of the Reporter's statement of who argued the cause, and refer to Jud„e Wool- 
ley s statement, to prove that Breck nridge states falsely. And to prove that the Senate 
and Court werem session when I argued the case, I present the Clerk's certificate: 
State of Kentucky, Set: 

Breckinridge's heirs, & al. vs. Ormsby, decree, of Jefferson. 
letl/o^^nua^l^. 1 ' 600 ^ " C ° Urt ° f A ^ eal9 ° ffice ' that argument was closed on th. 

J. SWIGERT. 

The following is an extract from a letter, dated "Lexington fS^^lhS^tSn^ !?r l^Vr 
Breckinridge," and addressed to the Hon. Chas. A. Wickliffe: 7 ' IM9, 81Sned Robert J * 
».t * v i , . WM. PRESTON. 

The gentleman then accuses me with slating untruly, of his conduct as a gambler and 
of his reasons for not smtlmg up his father's estate; and parses the certificates of h"s 
brothers W,l ham and John. Of William, I can only say that he has been a 1 ttle can 
tious; but his desire tosave his brother has made him omit the whole truth. As to John 

thVZh or 6 n W t"\ 7 ab ° Ut - h i S f 1 her ' S eSWte ' aDd did not know wheth « ^ stated 
he truth or not when he was induced to give his knavish brother the certificate. One 

th.ng I will say that both of them knew that although he had been about 17 years act- 
mg as trustee he never had settled his accounts; and another thing thev also knew wel 
that although General Porter had pressed him to a settlement, he never has got onlout of 
him; and a hird thing they both knew, and that was, that in the year 1833, when Gen 
Porter was last here, he not only engaged me to bring suit against the reverend gentl": 
man, to force him to a set, ement and left in my hands the papers and vouchers to do so 
but was induced to withdraw them by the interference of the said John and Willkm 
stter 15 ^! ? eh T S ? St 11)6 reVerend g " Mleman shouId ^ totbe h irs o thek 

^tlX Z r , I SeUled Wlth the certifiers > but has J» witli the certifiers 
he allot PH '. ^'r;,, H n l^T^ ^ his sister ' s husband - G *»^> *<«<** Ha* 
t*"Tl ? ^ Cab , e " 8 Wife her share of John Breckinridge's estate? I im- 
agine neither of the reverend certifiers will answer in the affirmative to any of thel 
questions. By the act of Assembly, the Circuit Court has the power, from ,™ 
time, to appoint commissioners to settle with the reverend gentleman; but seventeen 
C a hL tr ^"r aWa TV and "° Settlement yet ' as 1 am The cer mers X 

Beal ^ recovered" f 3 " th 'I"'' • ThiS ' ° n ,he V** P°<* Sam! 

bought i„ Tonn ? administrators of John Breckinridge (Cabell Breckinridge 

Beall then t',T " u l ^ 0n the WaWrs of Green Rifer - the P"P«ty °f Walter 
fhe everend^nH "7"' ™ I ,* m inf ° rmed ' Uttle sh °" of ^ thousand dollars, and 
knd ZZ A* I " 1>aS ' M ' am inf0rmfd and bMie ™< alfowod every acre of this 
ch i H^I l qU1 " erS and adTCrsary daims - with ° ut ^ing an effort to save an 
nnd^e' ? • , , Very V ' g ' lant ' when he has left the tw ° suif ^ the one, Breck. 
Z££Z%TZ *T% W f lte J Bea "' S ^ mi °!— ' and Samuel Beail's exe- 
on tne'dock t „ M M *T m r? es administrators against Lee and Nicholas, &c., stand 
on the docket unt.l thts day. I left one of these suits waiting for a final decree, and the 



38 



other for the service of process, in 1830; and the reverend vigilant agent has them j 1 
now in the same condition. Such is his vigilance. j { 

I would also ask the surviving certifier, what piece of property, or what suits or other * 
difficult business has the Rev. Rob't J. attended to vigilantly? 1 answer, not one! But 1 
as soon as I finished suits, he sold and sacrificed his father's lands, and pocketed or c 
squandered the proceeds. For instance, I recovered for the family two tracts of land in ! 
Mason— what has become of these lands, or the money received for them? I recovered < 
for them 333 acres of land adjoining the town of Nicholasville, then worth twenty dol- ] 
lars per acre, 6,600 dellars, now worth 80 dollars per acre to the infants, had he not f 
sold them, 19,800 dollars. I deeded to the heirs, 2.300 acres, extending on the Ohio, 
from the mouth of Patton's creek up, including Middle creek, then worth 5,000, now v 
worth to the infants 18,000 dollars. I recovered fur them about 800 acres of land on 1 
Harrod's creek, then worth 8,000 dollars, now worth 16,000 dollars. I recovered from I 
Ormsby, 8,000 dollars; from Beall's administrator, sny 8,000 dollars; besides the 4,000 8 
acres of land, then worth say 20,000. dollars, now worth 40,000. I recovered for the tl 
heirs 365 acres of land, from their aunt Meredith, then worth 7,100, now worth 24,150 I 
dollars. What has the gentleman done with all this property and all he got hold of by j 
his own vigilance and the vigilant and faithful counsellors he has paid, while he has left 
me unpaid, except by abuse 1 ? From his own statements, and from what I know, the 
estate of his father was clear of debt, save Lee's debt, and tint the judgment against ' 
Ormsby paid . Now how does it happen that his sister's children are houseless and | 
homeless in their grandfather's country, and that John alone of the heirs has a little ' 
speck of their father's estate; that Cabell's widow and children are houseless and home- 
less from their father's and grandfather's estate; and this faithful and trusty agent is 
buying out John and William , and all the heirs; and he alone, of all the heirs, has 
money and lands to brag about. Tell me how this happens, and not that your brother 
has had great difficulties. Name those difficulties, as the world will not believe your 
certificate. Ah! and tell why your reverend brother, when he was hunting for white 
washers among his family, did not apply to the illustrious husband of the elder branch 
of the family? His certificate would have been decisive. But he was very far from 
approaching Gen. Porter for certificates. Had not Porter, by the persuasion of John 
and William, withdrawn his papers, I would, e'er this, have taught the gentleman not 
only how to act as a trustee, but how and where he ought to settle his trust accounts, 
and I would have taught him too who, in reality, owns Breedalbane, alias his aunt Mere- 
dith's land. 

But the Reverend gentleman complains that in rendering my accounts, I charged 
item3 against him as trustee of his father, for monies paid for his brother Cabell's 
estate, and exhibits the items. The first is a suit of Logan & Morton, as he has it, 
(Logan & Hytle, it should be.) I charged Cabell Breckinridge one hundred dollars, 
he being joint socurity for Hytle, a non-resident, in an expensive suit here and in the 
Court of Appeals. I had to pay the whole expense, two hundred dollars, and I asked i. 
the return of one hundred dollars. Cabell Breckinridge had, for Col. Mercer, brought ! 
four writs of right, one against J. Davis, one against Caldwell, one against Champion, 
and one against Bob Davis, and was security for costs. I was the attorney for the de- j. 
fendants, and gained all the suits. My clients had judgments for costs, which amount- 
ed to the sum of 150 dollars. They not being able to get their costs out of the plain- 
tiff, he being out of the State, demanded of me to coerce them out of the estate of the 
security, Cabell Breckinridge. Sooner than do so, 1 paid the costs myself, expecting 
them of Col. Mercer. His widow, finding that her husband had taken in fee bills to 
the amount of $15,* sent a young man by the name of Breckinridge, (as he informed 
me,) with them, to me, to ask me to advance the amount. This I did, not doubting 



f M.y book says $35 sent, instead of $15 as stated by Mr. Breckinridge. 



39 



that Col. Mercer would pay me; but, on writing to him, he declined paying, replying 
that he had placed money in Cabell Breckinridge's hands to pay the costs. I placed 
the charges in the hands of the reverend slanderer, to be paid out of any monies which 
were coming to his brother, but which he has the meanness to refuse to pay, or any part 
of it. I could coerce every farthing of it, but I will sooner lose it than ask the widow 
and children of Cabell Breckinridge for it. I can, thank God, still give my children 
enough, if they are honest, never to treat a dead brother's friend as the reverend gentle- 
man treats me, in refusing payment, although he has, as I verily believe, a large sum 
in his hands, due his brother's estate. 

But the pious gentleman has said that the fifty-five dollars he paid Judge Woolley 
was the balance of my account. Now, gentle reader, this statement the reverend gen- 
tleman knew to be untrue, and yet he made it, with my account staring him full in the 
face. I will state my account, as I rendered it to Cabell, (not exhibited for payment, 
as the reverend preacher charges,) and as exhibited, for payment, to the reverend gen- 
tleman, leaving out, perhaps, the charge for a fee against Beall, Lee, Nicholas and Ow- 
ings, and another, whose name I did not insert in the account book before me: 

J. BRECKINRIDGE'S ADMINISTRATORS, 

TO ROBERT WICKLIFFE, Dr. 

1807. To fee in suit against Lee's Ex'rs, (demand $8,000, gained,) $10 

1808. " fee in second suit against same, (lost.) : : 20 
1811. " fee against David Wood, (demand 3,000 dollars, pained,) : 10 

«t " fee in suit against McKee and Kenton, for valuable lands, : 20 

i( «< fee in suit against same, for valuable lands, : : 10 
" «* fee in suit of Ross & Carneal vs. Preston & Breckinridge, for 2,800 a- 

cres of land, worth then 40, now 70 doll's per acre, (gained,) 50 
«« " fee in suit of Breckinridge's administrators vs. Beal's administrators, 

for £2,000, (gained,) : : : : 30 
*t " fee in suit of Morrison's heirs against Craig, Rice and others, for one 

thousand acres of first rate land, which was gained, : 40 

" <4 fee in suit of Breckinridge vs. Fowler, (gained in Chancery,) ; 10 

« " fee in suit of Breckinridge's admrs vs. Grubbs, (gained in Chancery,) 10 

" " fee in suit against John Green, (on motion, gained,) : 10 
« st drafting petition and attending Court to get commissioners appointed to 

divide estate, (gained,) : : : 5 

«' " amount paid John Mclntire, for going to Frankfort, and for papers, 15 
1813. " drawing bonds and making contract with Guthrie, &c, (sold land, 

received and paid over the purchase money paid,) : : 5 
1817. a fee in suit in Court of Appeals, vs. Lee's Executors, (gained,) 40 
4< " fee in suit of Morrison's heirs vs. Craig and others, in Court of Ap- 
peals, (gained,) : : : : 50 

1820. " fee in suit vs. Meredith, in Fayette and Court of Appeals, : 60 

1821. " fee in suit vs. Dallam, &c, (gained,) : 30 
u " fee in suit vs. same, in Court of Appeals, (gained,) : : 50 

1826. " drafting answer and demurrer to Ormsby's bill in Jefferson, : 10 

" «< fee in suit vs. Peter Ormsby, in the Fayette Circuit Court, (gained,) 30 

" " fee in suit vs. Beall, on bill of review, (gained,) : 50 

" " do. in Court of Appeals, (gained,) : '< 50 

" rt do. on motion to set sales aside, (gained,) : 20 

1829. " fee in suit vs. Ormsby, in Court of Appeals,, (demand, 8,000 dol- 
lars, gained,) ; : : : : 100 



Amount carried forward, 



$835 



40 



1829» To amount brought forward, : : : : $835 

k u fee in suit vs. Beall, in Court of Appeals, for land in the county of 

Oldham, (gained,) : : : : 50 

u <« f e e for second case, in Court of Appeals, against Lee's Executors, 

(gained,) : : : : : 30 

«< " fee in fourth trial in Woodford, (lost,) : I 30 

M " fee in same case, in Court of Appeals, (lost,) ; : 30 

$975 

CONTRA. 

1810. By the hire of Michael, (a thievish runaway that had lost part 

of his feet by frost, : : : $60 

1811. '* same negro's hire, : i : 75 
" " cash received on judgment against Grubbs, : : 163 
" i4 old books paid Woolley, : : : 55 

1829. '< C. A. Wickliffe's note, : : : 269 

618 



Balance, $357 

These charges will astonish the profession. They are less lhan one half of what :s 
an average charge by the proiession generally, and not more than one fourth of what 1 
would have charged a stranger; and for all I did for Letitia Grayson, for the heirs of 
Cabell Breckinridge, for all I suffered in the flesh in the jarrino- and controversy between 
the reverend gentleman and bis certifying brother-inlaw, David Castleman, for several 
suits against the widow of John Breckinridge, and for counsel, instruction and advice, 
given for iwency years, I have charged not a cent. And for all I have done for the Ad- 
ministrators, besides several fees not charged, for twenty years service, more successful 
than the world can produce an example of elsewhere, I have only charged 975 dollars; 
and have, in point of fact, received on hire an old, lazy frost-bitten, thieving, runaway 
negro, for two years; 55 dollars in old books; a judgment I recovered ©ul of an insol- 
vent debtor's security for 163 dollars; and credit for the infamous demand against my 
brother for 265 dollars — leaving 357 dollars which the honest preacher refuses to pay, 
and leaves me to lose 265 dollars paid for his brother Cabell; and, to cover his infamy 
has falsely stated that the old books sold Wo< Hey balanced our accounts. That the 
reader may further understand how this gentleman has treated me, I will state as a 
fact of which I was informed, and of which 1 have no doubt, that on Mr. Chinn's draft 
for his speech in Ormsby's case, he paid him, cash up, 200 dollars, while forjudge 
Woolley's and my own excessive labors in the case, I charged but 100 dollars, and this 
he basely refuses to pay. 

That the reader may learn how fair he has dealt with my brother, who rendered most 
Essential service to the estate, I will state his case as can be sustained by positive 
proof. On searching the rule docket of the Federal Court, I discovered a suit in the ] 
name of John Breckinridge against Walter Beall, claiming a thousand pounds and in- 
terest alleged to be due and owing from Walter Beall to John Breckinridge, secured by 
mortgage, and the record showed that Mr. Breckinridge had withdrawn the mortgage, j 
but had left a copy of it among the papers. As there was no pretence of jurisdiction 
fbr such a suit in the Federal Court, I concluded that if any thing was due on the 
mortgage to Breckinridge, (who I knew had some controversy about the debt,) he had 
only filed the bill in the Federal Court to bring Beall into terms. I knew him too well 
not to know that he had never brought the suit with a view to try it there. I of course 
had the suit dismissed for the want of jurisdiction, and instituted a suit to foreclose the 
mortgage, in the Fayette Circuit Court, within whose jurisdiction the Sheriff found the 
deviiee of BealL J was vigilant in having the process duly served on all the defend- 



41 



ants, and setting the cause down for trial at as early a day as I could do after I was 
ready. The devisees and I believe the administrators of Beall both answered, stating 
that the mortgage was obtained from Walter Beall by the fraud of J. Breckinridge, who 
had no claim whatever on Beall, but had entered his house knowing he was insane, and 
obtained the mortgage. 1 state from memory, and can only vouch that I mean to be 
correct, as to the defendant's answer. After answering, the representatives of Walter 
Beall neglected to file their papers and to take depositions before the time allowed by 
law for that purpose expired. I set the cause down on bill, answers, and exhibits 
for trial, and at the proper time I obtained a decree, the defendants still neglecting to 
defend. This decree was for principal and interest, amounting to about two thousand 
pounds, Kentucky currency. In obtaining this decree, I practised no art, took no advan- 
tage, as is infamously insinuated by the parson; but used simple and faithful vigilance. 
After the decree was obtained, the defendants tried first to set it aside by a bill of re- 
view. This I met and had it overruled, in both the Inferior and Supreme Courts. 
Ormsby, a sub-purchaser, then tried the same process, and was met and defeated in the 
same way. While this was the fate of bills of review, I still apprehended great dan- 
ger from the under purchasers, as the proofs were unquestionable as to Beall's insanity, 
but their remedy, if any, I knew was by original bill, and as the decree embraced prop- 
erty consisting principally of lots in Bardstown,! advised Cabell Breckinridge to spread 
his debt over the whole of the lots, so as to distribute the loss equally, and thereby make 
each lot-owner buy in his own property, and in this way prevent the whole of the lot- 
owners from com bining together, employing counsel, and greatly annoying him, if not 
finally defeating him. I knew that the mortgage embraced property, in value, to five 
times the real debt, and I knew that my brother Charles owned a lot of not much value, 
embraced in the mortgage, but as his lot was an old purchase from Beall himself, I 
knew that it could not be sold until the lots that were held by Beall and his representa- 
tives, after the sale to my brother's alienor, were first sold, and that such lots would sell 
at fair prices, for five times the debt. This I explained to Mr. Breckinridge, and des- 
patched him with a letter of advice and introduction, to engage the professional servi- 
ces of my brother, and as both were ignorant of the rule of equity, that the last prop- 
erty sold by the mortgagor shall be first sold to pay off the mortgage, Mr. Breckinridge 
stipulated that in no event should my brother's property be sold, or if sold, the price bid 
for it should be remitted . To prove this, I here present the reader with two letters from 
Cabell Breckinridge to Charles A. Wickliffe: 

Bardstown, March 13, 1822. 

Dear Sir: 

From an amended decree, in the case of Beall and Breckinridge's administrators, you will per- 
ceive that a second sale of the mortgaged premises becomes necessary to make up the amount of the 
money, not included in N. B. Beall's and Mr Ormsby's bonds. Gen. Lewis will show you the papers. 
I have directed him to advertise all the unsold property, except your lot. Have the goodness to con- 
sult with the General, as my interest may require. 

With respect, your friend, and servant, 

* J. CABELL BRECKINRIDGE. 

Lexington, June 24, 1820. 

Dear Sir: 

The concerns of my family, and the duties which devolve upon me at this Court, will prevent 
me from attending the sale of Beall's property, in Bardstown on Monday next. I feel this disappoint- 
ment the less, because I place implicit confidence in your judgment and discretion, in the management 
of this business. Were I present, I should submit m) self mainly to the guidance of Gen. Lewis and* 
yourself. Of the property contained in the mortgage, and embraced in the decree, I know nothing. 
The General and yourself are acquainted with the most, or at least, with a considerable part of it. 

Now, sir, I wish you to represent me on the occasion, and for that purpose, fully authorize and 
emnower you, to direct which of the mortgaged parcels shall be sold first; to bid for suchpiecea 
and articles of property, as you may dee n it advisable to purchase in, under the decree, and in all 
respects to act, as if you were acting in your behalf. I submit, however, the following views and 
wishes, which you will regard so far, as circumstances, in your opinion, may not render inconsistent 
with the best interests of those, for who*e benefit this decree has been made. 

My father's estate needs the money. I have made my arrangamants, in the management »f that 

6 



42 



estate, to make about fourteen hundred pounds of the contemplated sales, meet and discharge thai 
amount to ba paid by my father's heirs, when a cause that will be tried at the next term of the Court 
of Appeals; and in which we will fail, shall return. It would be desirable for the heirs to obtain the 
money, in preference to the mortgaged premises or chattels, because they have considerable real 
estate, and but little active capital. 1 would therefore, wish others to become the purchasers of the 
property, unless in such instances, as where said property is valuable, yielding present profit, or rapid- 
ly appreciating in value, and not selling for more than a fourth or a third, (in no instance a half to be 
exceeded) of its real value. 

I have not the least desire to interfere with the individuals who have purchased any of the property 
named in the mortgage, if it can be avoided consistent with my interests. We want our money — 
and nothing more. We desire not wantonly to interfere with the claims of others; but if we cannot 
ret what we most desire —what we are entitled to under the decree — and great speculations are to be 
made by the estate of Peall, we wish and intend to have all the benefit and profit of such specula- 
tions, if the purchase of property which nobody else will buy, can be called by that name, You will 
omit the sale of the property, in which you are personally interested. Gen. Lewis, in his letter to 
me, suggested (perhaps my memory deceives me, and you made the suggestion,) that it might be ad- 
visable to extend the credit. Under all the circumstances of the case, and after some renectioa, I 
am unwilling to do so. 

Some attempts, I believe, have been made to slop the sale. I cannot think any good cause can be 
shown for delay. 

This letter will be handed to you by Mr. Devore, by whom I shall be glad to hear from you. 

Yours, respectfully, 

J. CABELL BRECKINRIDGE. 
The sales were made in strict conformity to instructions, and were faithfully attend- 
ed to by my brother, who lived in the town, he bidding for Mr. Breckinridge only, ao 
as to make each owner pay according to the value of the lot and his circumstances. 
However, in selling Ormsby 's lot, he thought it justice to Beall and the other lot-hold- 
ers, to run him up, for his lot to four thousand and thirty dollars. This made the bal- 
ance of the mortgage a trifle to the poorer lot-owners. The reason why he run up 
Ormsby was, that he, Ormsby, was a speculator, and had bought the lot at Sheriffs 
sale for, I think, $1,000 only, and had sold half of it to James Smiley, for $4,000. 
When the commissioners had cried off all the lots but one besides my brother's, and 
that one a lot of little value, and as my brother's lot was not to be sold, he bid the bal- 
ance of the execution for the lot, thereby paying off the whole debt, and, pro-forma, 
put his bond in the hands of the commissioner. On Mr. Breckinridge's receiving the 
papers and consulting with me on a motion made by Beall to quash the sales, he stated 
that the commissioner had taken my brother's bond; that he certainly did not wish any 
order that would bind him to pay it, as my brother's services to him greatly exceeded 
in value the amount of the bond, and his buying the lot, was only relieving his own 
lot, which he was by contract bound to exempt. I told him as they were attacking 
the sales, we had better not say any thing about that bond; but have them all confirm- 
ed, and he could then send my brother his bond, to which he readily assented. The 
motion to quash was overruled, and the sales all confirmed, and I always thought that 
the bond had been returned to my brother, until about the year 1829, when Robert J. 
Breckinridge called on me to know how it was that his brother Cabell did not collect 
that debt. I told him that by express agreement between Cabell and myself, that bond 
was to be returned to my brother, and that his brother had, no doubt, without intention, 
neglected to do so; that I had been the cause of my brother's being engaged, and there- 
by deprived him of a fee from Beall and the settlers, and connected him in the claim 
against his neighbors; that he had rendered not only a valuable service but an irksome 
one, for which the whole note was a moderate compensation. 1 understood that he fully 
concurred with me, and never until he determined to have a break-out with me, and I 
caught him in the dirty trick which I shall presently discourse upon, did I ever hear that 
the gentleman intended to make my brother pay the bond, and to get compensation as 
he could for his services. When I learnt this, and that he had written my brother a 
most insolent letter about the debt, I sent the gentleman my own account for payment, 
directing that he should be told that as I had got my brother into the difficulty, 1 would 
pay his fee myselt The gentleman's pride -stooped to take the credit, and he gave up 



43 



the bond more than eleven years since, which, I am informed, was actually handed t# 
Charles A. Wickliffe, and yet is this honest preacher charging the bond with interest 
up to the date of his last book! 

Would to God that the reverend gentleman's venom had been exhausted in first de- 
frauding me out of my own account, and then out of the amount of my brother's note. 
This, and all the falsehoods he had theretofore heaped upon me, would have left me 
free to respect and venerate the name of his father, as I had always done. But, reader, 
if you will bear with me a few pages more, I will no longer detain you about his parol 
slanders, and such certifiers as his mother, Dr. Marshall and brother William, whose 
names are strewn through his book to hide and keep out of view the whole truth. The 
records of the land shall now speak and prove Robert J. Breckinridge an honest or a 
dishonest man. 

In my speech on page 6, speaking of John Lee's debt, I proceed to say: But added 
to this, George Nicholas and Walter Beall, gave John Breckinridge their joint bond, to 
indemnify Breckinridge and all creditors, and this said Robert J. Breckinridge found, 
among his father's or brother Cabell's papers, George Nicholas and Walter Beall's bond 
for indemnity, which he says he has lost, but which I have always believed he, for mo- 
tives which he knows I know, has hitherto suppressed. To this remark, Mr. Breckin- 
ridge with his accustomed impudence, after abusing me for a liar, in saying there ever 
existed such a bond, in the 10th page of his libel, breaks forth and says: 

" I demand of you, as a man long skilled in all the tricks that bring disrepute on the 
noble science of the law, to assign one tolerable reason, in this whole transaction, why 
there ever could have been such a bond, as you say you knew existed)" 

** ******** 

4< In other words, is it not perfectly clear, from the mere statement of the case, that 
neither Beall nor Nicholas could have executed such a bond; in other words, that no 
such bond ever existed." 

Now reader, could you believe that a man existed upon the face of the globe, that 
dare to utter what he has done, with a perfect knowledge of the existence of the bondj 
and that he, or his lawyer, at his instance, had filed it in the Clerk's office of the Fayette 
Circuit Court, artfully concealed in the folds of the old mortgage, among the papers of 
his suit against Lee, Beall and Nicholas. I here trouble you to read the bond, as copied 
by the Clerk from the original in his office, in the handwriting of the slanderer's father: 

This agreement, made this 1st day of March, 1798, between John Breckinridge, of the one part, 
and Walter Beall and George Nicholas, of the other part, witnesseth; that the said Brechinridg* 
hath this day sold to the said Beall and Nicholas, all his right and interest in and to the Iron Works, 
on Slate Creek . and all rights and interest in and to the lands he has any claims to lying- within three 
miles of the furnace , or within three miles of the forge agreeable to the contract entered into by the 
united company, bearing date the 6th day of March, 1795, the said Beall and Nicholas clearly under- 
stand, that they are to take just such title, as the said Breckinridge has in said Works, and the lands 
around the same, within the distance aforesaid, the said Breckinridge not hereby intending, meaning 
or agreeing to warrant the title thereto in any manner whatever, except against him, the said Breck- 
inridge or his heirs, or any person claiming under him or them, or to make any restitution of any kind, 
or reparation in damages, in case the title to the said works or any of the lands aforesaid should be 
evicted or lost. It is further agreed that the said Beall and Nicholas are to pay the persons from 
whom the said Nicholas and Breckinridge purchased any lands within the bounds aforesaid, the prices 
for the lands the said Nicholas and Breckinridge were to pay to persons from whom they purchased 
the same, upon the event of establishing the title thereto. 

All future expenses of investigation, &c establishing at law, or otherwise, the titles to any of the 
lands hereby sold by the said Breckinridge, shall be incurred by the said Beall and Nicholas; butth* 
said Bteckinndge is to stand bound for his personal services as a lawyer, on behalf of said titles, for 
which he is to make no charge. No demand is from this day to be made by the united company on 
the said Breckinridge; but the said Breckinridge is to settle his private account up to this time with 
the united company, and with George Thompson & Co. This said Breckinridge yields up to the 
said Beall and Nicholas, his third part in the negroes Charles, John and Abram, purchased in part- 
nership between him, Geo. Nicholas and Geo. Thompson, he also sells to said Beall and Nicholas, 
his third part of one half of 500 acres of land, conveyed to him by Jacob Myers, called the Mud 
Lick Tract, the said Nicholas and Beall complying with said Breckinridge's contract with said My- 
ers- It is further agreed and understood that ii upon settlement between Geo. Thompson & Co. and 



Jno. Cocky Owings & Co. agreeable to the contract of the 6th of March, 1795, the said Geo. Thomp- 
son & Co- .should iall in debt to the said John Cocky Owings & Co. the said Breckinridge shall stand 
responsible for the third part thereof, so far as one third of whatever part of three tracts of land in 
the name of Alex. St. Clair, of one thousand acres each, lately surveyed on Little Slate Creek, will 
amount to l&shillings per acre, and which may lie within three miles of the forge aforesaid, and in 
ease the said Geo. Thompson & Co . shall not, upon a settlement as aforesaid , fall in debt to the said 
John C Owings & Co. the said Breckinridge shall have nothing to pay to the said Beall and Nicholas 
on account of said St. Clair's land. And if the said John r*ocky Owing* & Ca. and Geo. Thompson 
&Co.do not, within 12 months from this date, settle their accounts as aforesaid, it shall be in the 
power of the said Breckinridge, on behalf of the said George Thompson & Co. to direct a suit or 
euita to be prosecuted against the said John C. Owings & Co. for a settlement, in all which said 
transactions in effecting the said settlement either by law, suit or otherwise, the said Breckinridge 
shall have a right to aid and vote in the same manner as if he had not sold to the said Beall his in- 
terest aforesaid. 

In consideration whereof, the said Beall agrees to sell to the said Breckinridge, one thousand acres 
of land on Bear Grass, as was allotted to the said Beall adjoining the lands of Alexander Breckin- 
ridge, the title to which, clear of any incumbrance or expense, the said Breckinridge is to obtain from 
the representatives or trustees of the said Samuel Beall, dec'd., from whom, in his lifetime, he pur- 
chased the same. Also, six hundred acres of land, about two miles below the mouth of Drennon's 
Lick Creek, on the Kentucky River, purchased also from the said Samuel Beall, the 8th day of No- 
vember, 1792, the title to which said land the said Breckinridge is to obtain as aforesaid, and for which 
the said Beall will not be answerable in any manner whatevdr, except that the said Beall will possess 
the said Breckinridge with an agreement entered into between him and the said S. Beall, in his life- 
time, on the subject of the said sale, whereby the said Breckinridge may, in case of deficiency of 
title, avail himself of all advantage by said agreement. It is clearly understood by the parties, that 
the said Walter Beall is not to warrant the goodness of the title to the said 1000 acres of land, the 
said Breckinridge resorting to the heirs of Samuel Beall, dec'd. in case the same shculd prove defec- 
tive. But it is also understood, that the said Breckinridge shall, in case the representatives or trus- 
tees of the said Samuel shall refuse to make a title to the same in fee simple with such warrants as the 
said Walter hath contracted, be enabled by the said Walter under his purchase aforesaid, to compell 
such conveyance, and in case the right of the said Walter shall not be sufficient for that purpose, he 
the said Walter shall in that case be liable to the said Breckinridge as warrantee. But incase the 
said Breckinridge, upon inspecting the agreement between said Walter and Samuel, shall not like the 
title to be conveyed to the said Walter, said Breckinridge will cancel the said contract. The said 
Breckinridge also, for the consideration aforesaid, sells to the said Beall and Nicholas, all his right 
to and claim in and to all goods and chattells, stocks of every kind, castings, store goods or property, 
or things of any kind belonging, ordebts due to the said united company. 

In witness whereof, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals, the day and year aforesaid. 

J. BRECKINRIDGE, [Seal.] 
WALTER BEALL, [Seal.] 

Test:— Isaac Telfair. G. NICHOLAS, [Seal.] 

MEMORANDUM. — The said Breckinridge agrees to surrender title to afcresaid Beall and Nicholas 
all his interest in the claim of three thousand acres, and in the name of John Mosely, although the 
whole tract may not lie within the bounds aforesaid. 

JOHN BRECKINRIDGE, TSeal.] 

Test:— Isaac Telfair. 

KENTUCKY— Fayette Circuit Court: 

I, Harry I. Bodley, Clerk of the Court, in and for the Circuit aforesaid, do hereby certify, that the 
within and foregoing instrument of writing is truly copied from the original, on file in my office, "in 
the Chancery suit of John Breckinridge's administrators vs. Beall's heirs, Lee's executors, &c. 

Given under my hand, as the Clerk of the Circuit Court aforesaid, this 27th day of August, 1841, 
and of the Commonwealth the 50th year. 

HARRY I. BODLEY, Clerk, 

By Jo. R. Megowan, D. C. 

Also, an official copy of the Mortgage, in his father's hand writing, in which the 
bond was carefully folded and concealed: 

This Indenture, made this 28th day of July, 1802, between Walter Beall of Bardrtown, of the 
one part, and Johu Breckinridge, of Fayette, of the other part, both of the State of Kentucky, witness- 
ed. Whereas, by an article of agreement made and entered into between the said Breckinridge of 
the one part, and the sai l BeaW and George Nicholas of the other part, bearing date the first of 
March, 1798, the said Breckinridge did sell to the said Beall and Nicholas, all his right and interest 
in, and to the Iron Works on Slate Creek, and to the lands appertaining thereto; and it was cove- 
nanted and agreed to, by the parties to the said agreement, that no demand should from the said 
first day of March, 1798, be made by the united company, on the said Breckinridge; the said 
Breckinridge having by the said contract, ceased to be a partner in said Company, and the said Beall 
and Nicholas become responsible for all the debts or demands for which the said Breckinridge has 
been liable as a partner, (except his private account with the united company, and Geo. Thomp- 
son & Co.) in order therefore, to more effectually secure and indemnify the said Breckinridge, his 



45 



heirsand assignees, from all debts and demands of what nature and kind soever, which may comes* 
gainst him or theni, (except his private account aforesaid) on account of his being a co-partner in 
eithei the united fom^any or George Thompson & Co., and completely to secure the saia Bierkin- 
ridge in the full and perfect execution in all its parts, of the contract entered into on the first day 
of March, 1798, as aforesaid, on the part of the said Beall and Nicholas ; he the said Waller Beall 
for the consideration aforesaid ; and also for the consideration of five shillings to him, the said 
.Beall in hand pa'-d; the receipt whereof he does hereby acknowledge ; he, the said Walter BeaU 
has hereby granted, bargained and sold unto the said John Breckinridge, his heirs and assignees for* 
ever, all his, the said Walter Beall's interest and claim in the Iron Works, on Slate Creek, in Mont- 
gomery county, carried on under the firm of John Cocky Owings & Co. which interest consists of 
eighteen forty-eighths in the said Iron Works; and also ail his interest, to wit: Eighteen forty-eighths 
in the property, both real and personal, belonging to said company, and which is included in the con- 
tracts of Co-partnership entered into between the memberscomposing the united company, dated the 
sixth day of March, 1795, as will more fullv appear by referring to the same . The said Walter 
.BeaU does also hereby grant, bargain and sell to the said Breckinridge and heirs, all the lands ly. 
ing in Montgomery county, in which he is concerned in interest with the heirs of George. Nicholas, 
dee'd.; also, 1250acros of land lying on the south side of Licking, at the mouth of Slate Creek, being 
part of a tract of 2500 acres entered in the name of Walter Daniel, subject, however, to his con- 
tract with Col. George Nicholas, respecting the same, with all and singular the appurtenances to 
the said several tracts of land and shares in the Iron Works, and other property thereunto belong- 
ing, and all advantages arising therefrom. And whereas, the said Walter BeaU by a certain deed 
of Indenture, executed to~the said Breckinridge, bearing date the 23d day of April, 1801, aud new 
of record in the office of the district court, held at Bardstown, reference thereto being had, will at 
large appear, did grant, make over and convpy by mortgage, to the said Breckinridge, sundry tracts 
of land, slaves, houses and lots, in order to secure the payment of a certain debt therein mentioned, 
which said property may ultimately prove more than sufficient to the discharge of the debt in the 
said deed of mortgage mentioned; and in case it should, the said Beall is desirous to subject the 
same to the purposes of his present mortgage. He, the said Walter Beall, hath for the considera- 
tion aforesaid, and for the consideration of five shillings to him in hand paid by the said Breckin- 
ridge, granted, bargained and sold unto the said .Breckinridge, all the lands, houses, lots and slaves, 
in the said mortgage mentioned and contained, with all the appurtenances thereunto belongingor 
appertaining. To have and to hold the said shares in the Iron Works, and the property both real and 
personal, belonging to the said company, and the said lands lying in the county of Montgomery, 
and all the lands, slaves, houses and lots, in the said deed of mortgage (which is recorded as a- 
foresaid in the District Court of Bardstown, as aforesaid,) which are mentioned and contained, 
with all the appurtenances to the same belongingor appertaining, to the said John .Breckinridge 
and his heirs and assignees, and to his and their only proper use and behoof forever. 1 Provided, al- 
ways that if the said Walter Beall shall secure and indemnify, the said Breckinridge and his heirs 
from all debts anddemands of what nature or kind soever, which may come against him or them on 
account of his be ing a partner in either the united company or in George Thompson & Co. as afore- 
said, and shall fully and completely secure him, the said Breckinridge and his heirs, in the perfect exe- 
cution in all its parts, of the agreement entered into between the said .Breckinridge on the one part,, 
and the said Beall and Nicholas of the other part on the first day of March, 1798, and which said a- 
greement is hereunto annexed and referred to. — That then ihis Indenture shall determine and be of 
no force and effect, anything therein contained to the contrary notwithstanding. In testimony 
whereof the said Walter BeaU hath hereunto set his name and affixed his seal, the day and vear 
first above written, signed, sealed and delivered. WALTER BEaLL, [Seal.} 

Test: G. T. Cotton, Nath. Hart, Jno. C. Can, John Hart. 

A Copy.Att., II. I, BODLEY, Clerk, 
By Jo. R. Megowan, D. C. 

On searching for the old copy of the mortgage, which I had left in the papers many 
years since, which I knew referred to the bond, in consequence of my observing the 
gentleman's brazen denial that the bond ever existed, I detected the gentleman's arti- 
fice in concealing the bond, by opening the old original mortgage in his father's hand 
writing, and finding the bond concealed in its folds, and that and the mortgage filed in 
place of the copy I filed and left in the cause, which copy has, by some hands, been ab- 
stracted from the papers. On discovering the original mortgage and bond, I demanded 
of the Clerks present, by what means the mortgage and bond had got info the papers, 
neither having any mark usual on the ba^k of papers that are legally and in the usual 
way filed in the office. The Clerks could give no account of the manner in which the 
papers came into the cause; but stated that the last persons that handled the papers were 
the reverend gentleman and his attorney, Madison C. Johnson, Esq. Knowing Mr. 
Johnson to be a perfectly upright man, I forebore to make any further remarks, until I 
could see him. He stated that he was totally ignorant how the papers came into the 
office; that he had, sometime before, taken a list of the papers on file, and on reading it, 
discovered that the bond was on file; that after he had taken the list of the papers, Mr, 



46 



John Breckinridge, a nephew of the reverend preacher, had called on him, as he suppa- 
sed by direction of his uncle, for a copy of the memorandum he had taken, which he 
gave him; and that subsequently, the reverend gentleman took him to the office to ex- 
amine and read ihe papers; that he did go with him, and in his presence, among the 
other papers, read both the mortgage and bond. I then told Mr. Johnson that Mr. 
Breckinridge had, in less than ten days after the examination, in his publication, denied 
the existence, not only of that bond, but of another bond, which I verily believed he 
had also suppressed. He has found that bond too, said Mr. Johnson, or a copy of it, in 
his father's hand writing. And, said J, where is that? He will hand it to me in a day 
or two, said he, and when he does, I will file it in the Clerk's office, where you can get 
a copy, &c. And here follows a copy of the last named bond, and of his father's mem- 
orandum of the nature of his contract with Beall and Nicholas, stating that within three 
miles of the furnace, Beall and Nicholas are to pay to Lee, for the whole of John Lee's 
claim at the rate of ten pounds per hundred, and for all the balance outside of the three 
miles, Nicholas was to pay two-thirds and he ©ne-third of the purchase money: 

AH lands held or claimed in Clarke county, by either G . Nicholas or J. Breckinridge, (except that 
purchased from Fowler,) and also the land claimed by Nicholas under Henry French, John Chile* 
& Simon Kenton's contract, for 1000 acres are the common property of the two; the said Nicholas 
holding two thirds, and Breckinridge one third .—This is meant of the land not included in our con- 
tract with the old company. G, NICHOLAS, 

(A Copy.) Oct. 14, '96. J. BRECKINRIDGE. 

Extract. — A copy from the above, that being a copy on file in my office in the suit of Breckio- 
ridge's adm'rs. vs Lee's exo'rs. HARRY I. BODLEY, Clerk, 

By Jo. R. Megowan, D.C. 

This tract, bought of Lee, and patented to Breckinridge and Nicholas, 9531 acres, 
on Slate creek, entered by Jo. Black well: 

Perhaps between three and four thousand acres of this tract come within 3 miles of the fur- 
nace. Whatever does belong to the Iron Company, they complying with Col. N's. and my contract 
with Maj. Lee, .Blacknell's agent. I claim ene third of what is out of those bounds; and will pay pro- 
portion ol tax, for what may b* out. I don'trecollert any thing of his other claims. I hare no interest 
in it. I am entitled to one third of the tract, and consequently will pay my proportion of the tax. 

The foregoing is a lot of lands enclosed to me by Maj. James Morrison, in a letter of the 12th 
instant, requesting me to state what I knew about them, and whether he ought to pay the taxes on 
them ; that Mr Davis had listed them, but suspected the list was erroneous. 1 made the observa- 
tions annexed to each tract, had this copy made oft* and returned him the original. 

June 19, 1»05. J.BRECKINRIDGE. 

Extract from the original filed in my office, in the Chancery suit of .Breckinridge's adm'rs. vs. 
Lee's ex'ors. Att. J. R. MEGOWAN. D. C. 

for H. I. BODLEY, Clerk. 

In the libel aforesaid, from page 8 to 18 inclusive, Mr. Breckinridge not only asserts 
but reasons to prove that the latter bond never existed, and winds up by saying to me, 
"and all you say about a joint bond is pure fiction.'* Yet, in a few days after he pub- 
lished these infamous falsehoods to the world, he files an amended bill in the suit a- 
gainst Beall and Nicholas, in which he files his father's land book, one leaf of which, 
containing a joint bond or article between his father and Nicholas, written on a leaf of 
the book, in the hand-writing of his father, stating that Nicholas owns two-thirds and 
he one-third of these lands; and his written memorandum that Beall and Nicholas shall 
pay for ail inside of three miles from the furnace, and for all outside of three miles, 
Nicholas was to pay Lee two-thirds, and he (Breckinridge) one-third, and in his amend- 
ed bill, so filed, charges the facts so to be. He also states, that the interference within 
the Iron Works property is partial; that for the interference, Beall and Nicholas are to 
indemnify him, and outside of the interference, Nicholas is to pay two-thirds. The 
bill so amended further states, that a survey filed in the cause, shows pretty accurately 
the nature of the interference and respective liability. Now, mark this: a survey was 
on file, showing the extent of Bealfs liability. I not only present these papers, but 
invite all persons, particularly the profession, to examine them to see if I state true or 
false: 



47 

To tha Honorable, the Judge of the Fayette Circuit Court, in Chancery sitting, by way of a* 
mindment to the original bill, against Lee's executors and others, your orators and oratrixes Mary 
H. Breckinridge, Robert J. Breckinridge, Wm. L. .Breckinridge, David Cattleman, Polley Cabell 
Breckinridge, Saml. M . Breckinridge, Margaret M. Breckinridge, Agatha M. Breckinridge, the 

four last infants, by their next friend, Wm. L. Breckinridge, John B. Grayson, • Porter, and 

— Porter infants by their next friend Peter B . Porter ; That since their last amendment Jno. 

Breckinridge has departed this life, and your orators and oratrixes, Polley Cabell Breckinridge, 
Samuel M. Breckinridge, Margaret M.Breckinridge and Agatha M. Breckinridge, are his only 
children and hoir3 at law, and they pray the suit may be revived in their names. That Robert C 
Harrison, one of the administrators of Jno. Breckinridge, dec'd. has departed this life, and they 
pray the suit may be abated as to him. They would further shew that by a late examination a- 
mong the papers of John Breckiuridge, dec'd they have fouud a copy of the agreement between 
•aid John Breckinridge and George Nicho!?s, showing that said Nicholas' interest in the lands 

Eurchased and held by them in Clarke county, was two thirds, and they aver that the purchase made 
y them of Lee's executors, was embraced in said contract. They also find a memorandum in the 
hand writing of said John Brechinridge, concerning the purchase, and stating the same fact shown 
by said agreement, and also showing that the original of said agreement was in the hands of George 
.Nicholas. Said copy of said agreement, and an extract from said memorandum are herewith filed, 
marked 1. & 2. They also file herewith a statement concerning the lands held jointly by said Breck- 
inridge and Nicholas. Also a plat made out with great care of said lands, showing that some three 
or four thousand acres of said land purchased of Lee, was embraced in the three miles circle 
from the furnace, and that said amount was sold to Nicholas and Beall, they paying the purchase mo- 
ney thereof to Lee, and for that amount, at least the mortgage of Beall is obligatory. 

They also charge that since the last answer of Nicholas' ex'rs. herein said executor and the 
heirs of George Nicholas, have had an adjustment, compromise or an arbitrament of the amount due 
to laid Heirs of the estate of their ancestor Geo. Nicholas, and it was aseertained that $5000 was 
due them from said executors and said account has been paid over by said executo r to Saml. Nicholas 
and Richard Hawes. They also state, that since that time said executor has collet ted from the 
State of Virginia or the Government of the United States, the half pay due to said Nicholas as 
an officer of the Revolution, amounting to some $5000, which he has in like manner paid over to 
said Saml. Nicholas and Richard Hawes. M. C. JOHNSON, 

For Complainants. 
A Copy, Att. H. I. BODLEY, Clerk, 
By Wm. H. Pritchartt. D . C . 

From the above it will appear that Mr. Johnson, at the instance of Mr. Breckinridge, 
in an amended bill, with the whole document before him, states the bonds and the lia- 
bilities, respectively of Beall and Nicholas, precisely as I had done, notwithstanding 
Mr. Breckinridge had pocketed the papers, and not only refused me a sight of them, but 
with the impudence of the devil himself, had denied that such papers ever existed. Now, 
my countrymen, notice that Mr. Breckinridge not only admits himself, that his lawyers 
had furnished him with extracts of the papers on file, and of the steps taken; but that 
he is the sole agent and manager of the suit, and his father's business generally, and 
has had all these papers since 1824, and yet, that in 1841, he. to blacken my character, 
denies that the papers ever existed; and then s'lamelessly exhibits the very papers them- 
selves, in the Clerks office!!! You have heard my friends, of a thief stealing a chattle, 
and to avoid detection, slipping it into the pocket of an honest man. You have read of 
a horse thief when pressed by his pursuers, banding the stolen horse to a foot traveller 
to lead, then escaping, and leaving the honest man to suffer. But does either of these 
cases come up to parson Breckinridoe) He, after keeping the papers out of view, and 
branding me with falsehood, in saying they existed, brings the very papers into court, 
instead of hiding himself as the modest thief did, by fleeing from iustice. I here ask 
any man living, whether the conduct of Mr. Breckinridge has its parallel for treachery 
and impudence upon the earth? 

But Mr. Breckinridge, in page 11, of his libel, not content with branding me with 
falsehood in saying such papers existed, attempts to ridicule the idea that he couid have 
motive to suppress the papers, or either of them. To fully comprehend what I shall say 
to prove his motives for suppressing the papers, the reader must know that the Iron 
works company, consisting of John C. Owings, Walter Beall and John Breckinridge, 
drew an imaginary line around the Bourbon furnace at a distance of three miles, which 
in all contracts is called the company's bounds; in which bounds, all members of the 
company owning lands, had a right to surrender them to the company at valuation, and 



48 



take the amount in slock; that the lands within this circle had been pretty much surren- 
dered, and that the stock had been multiplied to forty-eight shares, of which J. C. Ow- 
ings (the largest stockholder) owned twenty four shares, and Beall, Nicholas and Breck- 
inridge the balance, Breckinridge being, I believe, the smallest stockholder, and not 
owner of 18-48ths, as his hopeful son so repeaatedly states; that in much of the north 
east of this circle of three miles from the furnace, there wns a considerable space still 
not owned by the company when Breckinridge sold out; that Breckinridge and Nicholas, 
on the 5th day of August, 1795, bought of John Lee 9,5314 acres of land, for which 
Breckinridge was to pay one third of ten pounds per hundred acres and have one third 
of the lands, and Nicholas was to pay two thirds, and have two thirds of the lands; that 
this land interfered, according to John Breckinridge's memorandum, between three and 
four thousand acres within the three miles circular line around the furnace, but as the 
survey on file shows, on the north east, and a part where the company had no land. 
The balance of the survey was outside of the three miles circular line and not touched 
by Beall and Nicholas'' contract of '98, but to be divided by Breckinridge and Nicholas' 
contract of partnership. 

It is agreed between John Lee of the one part, and George Nicholas and John -Breckinridge of the 
'-other part trs follows: That the said Lee hath this day sold to the said Nicholas and Breckinridge 
the one moiety of a claim for 19,062£ acres of land by entry made the 30th of July, 1784, in the name 
of Joseph Blackwell, adjoining Walter Daniel's entry of 2,500 acres at the mouth of Slate Creek, 
for which the said Nicholas and .Breckinridge are to pay said Lee at the rate of ten pounds per hun- 
dred acres for the same, or so much thereof as shall be hereafter found to be of in~lisputable title, 
the price thereof not to be paid until the title thereto shall be legally and indisputably ascer- 
tained. The said George Nicholas and John Breckinridge are to take the trouble and expense 
of settling and investigating the title, and to pay all taxes that shall accrue after this date, the 
said Lee to pay all back taxes which are now incurred. And whereas, the said Nicholas and 
.Breckinridge are concerned in sundry claims in that quarter , whereby it is very probable interferences 
may exist between such claims and the aforesaid claim purchased of said Lee, it is now understood by 
and agreed to between the parties, that in all such cases of interference, the said Nicholas and Breck- 
inridge do agree to make a fair and proper statement of such interferences, which shall be submitted 
to disinterested men, chosen by the parties, whose award shall be conclusive as to the right And it 
is lastly agreed, that so soon as the. said Lee shall be required, and the situation of the title ot the 
aforesaid moiety hereby sold, or whatsoever part thereof that may be saved will almit, that he will 
convey to the said Nicholas and Breckinridge by good and sufficient deeds of conveyance. 

In witness whereof, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals, the 6th day of August, 
1795. 

G. NICHOLAS, [SeaU 
JOHN BRECKINRIDGE, | Seal.] 

Tests Chas. Tompkins, [SeaZ.] 

(A Duplicate.) 

A copy— Att. H. I. BODLEY, Clerk, 
By Jo. R. Megowaj*, D. C. 

The contract as evinced by the suppressed bond, bound Breckinridge to release to 
Beall and Nicholas all the lands within the circle aforesaid being about three or four 
thousand acres, but the mortgage only bound Beall to pay Lee for the land within the 
partnership lands and of course did not bind Breckinridge's heirs to release between two 
and three thousand acres within the circle, not covered by the corn pan v's property. Yet, 
the bond did bind him to release every foot within three miles of the furnace. 

By suppressing the bond the gentleman expected to be able on the mortgage to coerce 
from Beall the ten pounds per hundred acres, and then under his father's patent to hold 
all Lee's claim not covered by the company's lands within the three miles circle around 
the furnace. 

This is one fraudulent purpose the parson had for suppression. I will give you another. 

It will already appear that I commenced a suit in Chancery about 1812 for Breckin- 
ridge's administrators against Beall's administrators and others, and obtained a decree for 
a thousand pounds, with interest thereon from 1801 until paid. That BealPs heirs and 
under purchasers, of which Peter B. Ormsby was one, contended that, 1st. Breckinridge 
Jiad no claim earthly for the one thousand pound mortgage, but that he had entered ] 
BealFs room when he was a lunatic and mad, and obtained nis signature to the mortgage' j 



49 

| conveying property to the amount in value of more than $100,000. That the mort- 
gage was obtained under pretence that Breckinridge had lost the 600 acre tract, on the 
Kentucky river, and that the said land had been patented to Breckinridge, when by the 
original contract it was expressly stipulated that Breckinridge was to have no recourse 
upon Beall in any event whatever, should the six hundred acres of land be lost. Orms- 
by had, from about 1833-4, a Bill of injunction, charging those facts, in the Jefferson 
Circuit Court. I had obtained the decree on the mortgage, not knowing or believing 
that there was a word of truth in the allegation that Breekinridge should have no recourse 

; if the six hundred acres of land should be lost. The proof was irresistable that Walter 
Beall was a lunatic at the date of the mortgage. It was not only proven by the family 

; physician but by many others, some of them the first men of the country; such as John 
Rowan, George M. Bibb and Martin H. Wickliffe. But the family and friends of Beall 
could find no such original bond. The original bond, when I read it, proves every word 
stated, and fully proves that Mr. Breckinridge was in no event to look to Walter Beall if 

! the land should be lost. 

Had 1 have seen this bond, the gentleman knew from my conduct in his aunt Mere- 
dith's case, that I would have suffered my tongue to have been drawn from my throat 
sooner than have aided in the recovery. Hence it was that I could never get a sight of 
the bond; and further, as the attorney of Owings' creditors, I would have discovered on 

i the face of the bond that they had all the claim of Breckinridge within the three miles 
circuit as a fund to pay Owings' debts; and I would, from the clause that stipulated that 
Breckinridge should risk the title to the six hundred acres, have found out that I was 
pressing, and had been pressing a moat iniquitous and unconscientious claim, and quit 
the gentleman as I did on the Meredith claim; and per possibility, Walter Beall's admin- 

: istrators, on his filing the bond, might file their bill of review on the discovery of the 
bond and rip up the whole affair. So, gentle reader, you see that this cunning parson 
had not only reasons, but sinister reasons for suppressing the bond both from me and from 
Beall 's heirs. He had a further reason for suppressing it: 1st. It was, as I said, a 
pretext and excuse (for keeping alive the controversy with me) to Gen. Porter and oth- 

: ers. And 2d. After I detected him in the attempt to obtain from the court a decree for 
upwards of $8,000 against Col. Owings, and charged upon him the suppression of the 
bond, he utterly denied that the bond existed to his brothers and all others, and until 

j now, shame! kept it hid since the year 1830. But the gentleman finding that he 
must lose his claim or produce the paper, after the most degrading falsehood in denying 
its existence, when he balances between his disgrace and his money, degrades him- 
self still further by bringing forth the paper and being witness against himself that he 
is not only destitute of common honesty, but of all veracity. 

I herewith present to the reader auopy of the original mortgage from Beall to Breck- 
inridge of 1801, as well as the depositions to show Beall's insanity: 

Whereas, Walter Beall. senior, is indebted to John Breckenridge in the just sum of one thou- 
sand pounds, currency of Kentucky, now due, which he has the privilege of discharging in good 
lands, and the said Beall being desirous of securing the payment thereof to the said Bieckinridge: 
Now this indenture, made this 23rd day of April, 1801, between the said Beall, of the county of 
Nelson of the one part, and the said Breckinridge, of the county ot Fayette of the other part, wit- 
nesseth, that the said Beall for the censideration aforesaid, and also in consideration of the gum of 
five shillings, current money of Kentucky, to him in hand paid, the receipt whereof is hereby ack- 
nowledged, hath granted, bargained and sold, and by these presents doth grant, bargain and sell to 
the said John Breckinridge and his heirs and assigns forever, the following real and personal es- 
tate, to-wit: The lots of land belonging to the said Beall in Bardstown, known by their numbers, 
55 56, on which stands the house the said Beall lives in, also another in said town, known by its 
number 53, on which stands the said Beall's old store house, also another lot in said town, known 
by its number 58, whereon Wm. J. Roward lived, also two lots in said town, known by their num- 
bers 129, 130, below the spring, including a dwelling house, also a lot in said town known by its No. 
78, and also a lot in said 1own, known by its No. 26, whereon the school house stands, also the fol- 
lowing slaves, of the following ages, to-wit: 

Jehn, 27 years old ; York, 23 years old ; Basil, 16 years old; Frank, 21 years old; Harvey, 16 
years old; Nat, 23 years old; Rozell,35 years old; Ben, 19 years old; Daniel, 19 years old, and Amy, 
15years old. 



50 



Also, the following tracts of land, to-wit: 4,172 acres patented in the name of Ignatius Fig- 
man, by patent dated the 9th day of June, 1798, and lying in the now county of Ohio; also the two 
thirds of an undivided tract of 5,000 acres, granted to the said Beall and Adam Guthrie, by patent 
bearing date the 5th day of October, 1798, and lying in the county of Nelson; also 522 acres 
patented in the name of the said Walter Beall, the'lOth day of March, 1791 and lying in the county 
of Mercer, both granted to the said Beall by patent bearing date the 11th day of March, 1791 ; 
also one equal moiety or half part of the following tracts of land which the said Walter Beall is en- 
titled to under a written contract made by him with Samuel Beall dated the 24th day of Novem- 
ber, 1796, to-wit: 2,000 acres in Shelby county, entered the 13th of April, 1780, in the name of 
Samuel Beall, assignee of John Hughes, on a military warrant, on the head branches of Brashears 
Creek and Fish Fork, adjoining and above Uriah Stone's land ; 2,000 acres in Shelby county, entered 
the I3th day of April, 1780, in the name of John May assignee of the said Hughes, on a military 
warrant, adjoining the said Samuel Beall's 2,000 acre entry aforesaid; also 50 acres entered in the 
name of John May, the 29th day of April, 1780, on the first Island in the Ohio above Diamond Island ; 
also 50 acres in the same name and of the same date, on the Hunter's Datt from Harrodsburg to 
Green River, to include the Copperas mine at the Knob on Indian Lick, on said Piatt; also 600 acres 
entered the I8th day of March, 1780, in the name of John Smith, assignee, &c. on Panther Creek ; 
also one equal half of 600 acres, entered the 24th day of April, 1780, in the name of Mrs. Mary 
Byrd, Exr'x. &c. on a military warrant on the Ohio, beginning at the mouth of a small creek 
emptying in about 12 miles above the mouth of Salt River, &c. with all the appurtenances to the 
said several lots and tracts of land appertaining, all which said slaves, lots and lands were on the 
28th day of April, 1800, mortgaged to Robert Andrews and John Pierce, acting Trustees of the 
estate of Sam'l. Beall, deceased, as will appear by the said deed of mortgage now of record in the 
office of the Clerk of the county of Nelson, but which said property is conceived by the said 
Walter Beall more than sufficient to discharge the sum of money for which the same is mortgaged to 
the said Trustees. 

The said Walter Beall doe3 also hereby give, grant, bargain and sell unto the said Breckinridge, 
his heirs and assigns, one other tract lying in the county of Montgomery, on a branch of Mill creek, 
which is a branch of Slate creek, one thousand acres of land, by patent bearing date the fifteenth 
day of July, 1798; also one equal half of a tract of 15,13o£ acres entered, surveyed and patented in 
the name of Basil Holmes as will more fully appear by said patent bearing date the 30th day of 
February, 1788, the moiety of which said tract the said Beall claims under a written contract made 
with the said Basil Holmes, bearing date December, 1786, but it is understood by the parties, that 
the said Beall shall have a right to mortgage the said land to the said Holmes' heirs or representa- 
tives for the payment of the remainder of the consideration money which he shall be obliged to pay 
in virtue of the aforesaid original contract of December, 1786; to have and to hold the said slaves 
with the future increase of the females thereof, and the said lots of land and all the said tracts of 
land above mentioned and described, with all their appurtenances to the said John Breckenridge and 
his heirs and assigns forever, and the said Walter Beall, for himself, his heirs, executors, &c. doth 
covenant with the said Breckinridge, his heirs, &c. that he will forever warrant and defend the title 
to the before mentioned slaves and the future increase of the females thereof, and also the titles to 
the lots in Bardstown, with their appurtenances to the said Breckinridge and his heirs and assigns 
forever, against the claims of all persons whatsoever. And the residue of the lands herein des- 
cribed and enumerated, the said Walter Beall does hereby bind himself, his heirs, executors and ad- 
ministrators, to warrant and defend against himself and his heirs, and all persons claiming under 
him or them only, and in case the said last mentioned lands or any part thereof are actually sold, and 
the title thereof or any part thereof evicted by any other claims, the said Beall does hereby bind 
himself and his heirs, &c. to refund the purchase money whieh they shall have actually sold for, and 
the interest thereon antil paid. Provided however, and this indenture is upon, this condition, 
that in-case the said Walter Beall his heirs, executors or administrators shall well and truly pay to 
the said John Breckinridge, his heirs, executors, &c. on or before the first day of November next, 
the just and full sura of one thousand pounds current money of Kentucky, which was to be paid 
in lands of good quality and title, the price thereof to be estimated in cash, by men to be chosen by 
the parties, in case the said parties cannot agree on such price, then, and in such case, this convey- 
ance to be void and of no effect. But in case the said .£1,000 or the value thereof in lands as afore- 
said shall not be paid on or before the said 1st day of November next, then the said .£1,000 and 
interest shall be liable to be recovered by foreclosing said mortgage, and at any time the said Breck- 
inrdge may think proper so to do. 

In witness whereof, the said Walter Beall has set his name and affixed his seal, the day and year 
first above written. 

WALTER BEALL, [SeaZ,] 

Signed, sealed and delivered in presence of 

Bardstown District, Sct: 

To all to whom it may concern, I Benjamin Grayson, Clerk of the Supreme Court for the Dis" 
trict aforesaid, do make known that on the 23rd day of April last, Walter Beall, a party to the 
within instrument of writing personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same to be his 
voluntary act and deed, for the purposes therein expressed and that I have reeorded the same in- 
strument of writing m my office as required by law. Witness my hand , this 8th day of May, 1801. 
* , 4 , , cn BEN. GRAYSON. 

A copy fiom the record of Breckinridge vs Ormsby , in the Court of Appeals. 

J. SWIGERT, C. C A. 



51 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -.-Eighth Circuit Ky. Di»trictSct: 

John Breckinridge, Comp't. i 

against > In Chancery. 

Walter Beall, &c. Def 'ts. > 

Extracts from the deposition of Walter Harris, taken and fled in the above case: 

I had been in the habit of doing business for Walter Beall for upwardsof two years before said 
Breckinridge obtained the mortgage of said Beall, and have lived in his bouse ever since some time in 
April, 1801. 

John Breckinridge came to said Beall, I heard the said Breckinridge tell said Beall that a certain 
six hundred acres of land on Kentucky, or Drenning's Lick, which said Breckenridge was to hare 
of said Beall, was surveyed in the wrong place and the land would be lost. The said Breckinridge 
then observed that the six hundred acres of land was worth twelve hundred pounds, and contended 
a considerable time for the twelve hundred pounds. He after said he would take one thousand pounds, 
and then threatened said Beall if he did not give him a mortgage on his property for one thousand 
pounds, he would immediately bring a suit against the said Beall. The said Beall then entered into 
a mortgage. I knew the said Beall at the aforesaid time not capable of transacting his business to ad- 
vantage. I requested the said Beall not to give said Breckinridge the mortgage until he could 
fully examine the claim of the land. The said Beall observed that the said Breckinridge he sup- 
posed would not take any advantage of said Beall. He surely is my friend and will serve me in my 
ether business. 

Also, an extract from the deposition of Henry Chapeze, taken and filed in the same 
case, to-wit: 

In the month of April, 1801, I was called by the family of Mr. Beall to visit him as a Physician of 
the family. I found him entirely deranged in his mind, in such a degree that I recommended Mrs. 
Beall, positively to let him see no person, and be careful that he should deal nor contract with any 
person, as he was entirely out of his senses and unfit for business, and during my frequent visits to 
Mrs. Besll's I found a Mr. John Breckinridge had, or was attempting to transact some business with Mr 
Beall. Mrs. Beall informed me that Breckenridge was threatening to sue Mr. Beall. I told her, mad- 
am, let him sue, and justice will be found out between them. But Mr. Beall is not fit for business. 

A few days afterwards, I asked Mrs. Beall if he had settled with Breckenridge. She told me, 
Lord, Doctor, he has given Mr. Breckenridge a raortgege for all his property. 

Also, an extract from th« deposition of Richard Lansdale, taken and filed in th« 
same cause, to-wit: 

Question by W. Beall's attorney — Do you know the time John Breckinridge obtained a mortgage 
from the said Beall? 
Answer — I do, it was in the spring of the year, 1801. 

Question by same — What was the situation of Mr. Beall's mind at that time? 

Answer — I was frequently at Mr. Beall's about that time, and always thought him deranged. 

Also, a copy of a receipt from J. Breckinridge to Thos. Tunstall, Clerk of the Dis- 
trict Court of Kentucky, for a deed of mortgage, to-wit: 

Received of Thomas Tunstall, Clerk of the District Court of the United States, in and for the Ken- 
tucky District, a deed of mortgage for sundrie lands and slaves, bearing date 23d April, 1801, which 
was filed by him in the suit in Chancery by John Breckinridge, Esq. against Walter Beall. 

May 8th, 1805. J. BRECKINRIDGE. 

Test:— H. Tunstall. 

The above and foregoing are true extracts from depositions and receipt filed in the case before 
mentioned. Att:— JNO. H. HAJNTNA, C C. C. K. D. 

State of Kentucky, Set: — Court of Appeals. Spring Term, 1829. 
Breckinridge's admr's. vs. Ormsby — Appeal from a decree of the Jefferson Circuit Court. 
Extract from the deposition of M. H. Wickliffe. 

Question by Complainant — What isyour opinion of the state of said Beall's mind, and its capaci- 
ty for business when you saw him as aforesaid? 

Answer — He was not capable of business when I saw him as above. I thought his mind unsound; 
I have known him upwardsof thirty years. 

Question by same — What was reputed at the time to be the state of said Beall's mind? 

Answer — He was generally reputed to be of unsound mind, and incapable of business at that time. 

Question by same — How long did his derangement of understanding continue, and in what year? 

Answer — From general report, it continued from twelve to eighteen months, and throughout the 
year 1801, I never thought him as sound afterwardsas before. 

Extract from the deposition of John Rowan. 

Saith that in the year 1801, he resided in Bardstown, on the opposite side of the street from the 
residence of the late Walter Beall. He states that he was intimately acquainted with the said 



52 



Walter, had been his lawyer, employed in all his business at that place, and was then in a state of 
retainer by him. 

Question by Complainant— What was the state of said Beall's mind during the year 1801? 

Answer— I believed the said Walter to be in a state of derangement during all the spring and 
summer of that year. I changed my residence from the town to the country, whereby my oppor- 
tunity of observing the state ot his mind was diminished. 

Extract from the deposition of George M. Bibb. 

And upon this deponent's visit to said Beall and his family, he found that the rumor was founded 
in fact and in truth. In the latter part of the year 1800 and in 1801, this deponent was often at said 
BealPshouse, was sent for sometimes by the family and sometimes visited there of his own accord, 
he found said Beall's mind deranged. He was filled with the most childish fears and extravagant 
apprehensions of personal danger. He was genearlly closely confined by his state of mind to his 
own chamber, where this deponent saw him. His business and household affairs, so far as this depo- 
nent had any knowledge of them, were conducted by his wife and his friends, he being from mental 
derangement incapable of making even the necessary and usual provisions for the comfort and 
accommodation of his family. In the year 1801, said Beall removed from town and occupied a farm 
in the country. 

Otmsby vs. Breckinridge's adnCrs. fyc. 

Memorandum. — Upon motion of complainant, on the day. a rule was made upon Samuel Nicho- 
las to produce the agreement in complainants bill mentioned, between George Nicholas, &c. Walter 
Beall and John Breckinridge, under date of 1st of March, 1798, and thereupon, said Nicholas pro- 
duced the agreement marked (No. 23, D.) which complainant moved to file in this case as an exhibit 
with leave to prove the execution of the same on the trial of this case, and the administrators of John 
Breckinridge objected to the filing of said paper, and also objected to the rule giving the complainant 
leave to prove its execution upon trial, but the court overruled the objections, and granted complain- 
ant leave to file said paper, and to prove its execution on the trial, without any evidence or affidavit 
being produced. To which opinion of the court, the defendants, administrators of John Breckin- 
ridge deceased, excepts and prays, &c. 

JOHN P. OLDHAM, [ Seal.-] 

A? Clerk of the Court of Appeals, I have been requested to make the foregoing extracts from the 
record, which are done truly. I further state that the answer of Breckinridge's administrators is 
signed R. Wickliffe, for defendants, and that the exhibit mentioned in the bill of exceptions is copied 
in the record afterwards. 

J. SWIGERT, C. C. A. 

8th September, 1841. 

I only ask the reader to say what must be my reflections at being the innocent cause 
of ruining Beall's devisees, and putting into the pockets of Breckinridge's heirs more 
than two thousand pounds, besides the four thousand acres of land, on such a claim, and 
that without a farthings compensation, except the vile calumnies of Robert J. Jefferson 
Breckinridge! Thus ends my remarks on what the gentleman calls the grand point in 
his controversy, and if I have not nailed him, by the records, a vile calumniator and fab- 
ricator, there is no truth in record evidence! 

I will now, fellow citizens, resettle accounts with the gentleman on his conduct in 1830 
when I withdrew from all the business of the Breckinridge family, and the gentleman, I 
hoped forever. In all I have heretofore said, I have as much as possible avoided speaking 
of the terpitude of the gentleman, the affair to which h$ has devoted several columns to 
prove that I acted faithlessly to his fathers estate. If the man had paid my account and 
not faithlessly refused to do so, and fabricated falsehoods to cover his fraud in not making 
payment, the public might receive from his pen with more credence a charge against me 
than they ought now to do. 

To enable the public to fully understand the position I occupy, and that which the 
reverend parson occupies, it is necessary to keep in mind that this suit between Breckin- 
ridge's administrators and Beall's devisees, &c.is distinct from the case of Beall, where- 
in the reverend gentleman pocketed more than ten thousand dollars, against, all the 
principles of equity and justice, on a mortgage taken from a lunatic, and for a claim 
which his father's own hand and seal proves to be without the shadow of foundation. 

I have already stated that by the bond of March, 1798, George Nicholas and Walter 
Beall bought out John Breckinridge in the Iron works, and the land within three miles 
of the furnace, being, as 1 believe, six forty-eighths only. That Beall and Nicholas 
agreed in the articles of purchase to pay, for Breckinridge, the owners of land within 



53 



the three miles, whatever Breckinridge owed on executory contracts, for the land sold 
within the three miles of the furnace. That George Nicholas and John Breckinridge 
had, in August, 1795, bought of John Lee 9,53 H acres of land, for which George Nich- 
olas was to pay two thirds and John Breckinridge one third, and were to divide the land 
by Nicholas having two thirds and Breckinridge one third. This is evinced by the 
papers filed. This claim in point of fact does not include 3,000 acres (but say 3,000 
acres) within the three miles circumference line around the furnace, so that Breckinridge 
sells to Beall and Nicholas precisely 1,000 acres within the three miles, and not an acre 
more. That is 500 acres to Beall and 500 acres to Nicholas. The price Breckinridge 
bought at and owed Lee was precisely ten pounds on the hundred acres, so that every 
dollar Beall owed in his own right was fifty pounds, and Nicholas owed for twenty five 
hundred acres, which is two hundred and fifty pounds, altogether three hundred pounds, 
or $1,000; besides interest. Beall, however, was security to Nicholas for £250, and 
Nicholas was security to Beall for £50. On these sums, the jury in the case of Breck- 
inridge and Lee allowed some interest, and that ought to be added with all the parties 
before the court. The Chancellor will of course decree, first, Nicholas to pay £250 
and Beall to pay £50, and in default, that Nicholas's property shall be sold to pay 
£250 and Beall's to pay £50, and if either fails in property, the deficiency to be made 
up out of the property of the other.* To have a decree thus made, as regards Beall and 
Nicholas inside the circle, and to have a decree against Nicholas' executor for two 
thirds paid by Breckinridge on his and Nicholas' purchase outside of the circle, I filed 
a bill for Breckinridge's administators, stating and setting out with precision the extent 
and nature of the claim, and that Thomas Dye Owings, who was made defendant, was 
bound to pay for Beall. Beall to comply with his and Nicholas' bond of the 5th of Au- 
gust, 1793, gave a mortgage upon 18 48ths shares in the company's property. A sur- 
vey had been made that showed that the interference with the company property was 
only partial. The bill prayed a survey to be made of the interference^ so that the court 
might be able to decree how much Breckinridge's administrators were entitled to receive 
of Beall's administrators and of Nicholas' executors. This suit was originally intended 
to obtain an injunction against Lee's proceeding at law, on the covenant to pay £10 per 
hundred, upon the ground that the land was all taken by other claims; but the injunction 
failing, the suit barely remained on the docket, without its being thought worth prosecu- 
tion, until about 1826 or '7, when the judgment of Lee's executors against Breckin- 
ridge was affirmed in the Court of Appeals. I advised the reverend parson, who then 
pretended to be a lawyer, to amend the bill, and among other things, to alledge the re- 
covery of the judgment, to sue out process and to bring all the parties in the bill before 
the court, promising the gentleman, although I would not attend to the preparation of the 
cause, that I would act as counsel in it. He sometime after came to me with the very 
identical paper which I make a part of this address, the copy of his father's and Nicho- 
las' land contract, from which J drew the amended bill, which is almost verbatim with 
Mr. Johnson's bill which I have presented the reader with. So far as relates to the 
liabilities of the parties, Mr. Breckinridge knew that neither Nicholas' heirs nor Beall's 
executors were served with process, and made some efforts to bring them before the 
court, but through sheer laziness and worthlessness, he has failed to bring them before 
the court to this day. 

In this state of the case without my knowledge, he supplanted me in the cause by 



*Since writing the above, I have discovered from a memorandum filed in the Clerk's Office of 
the Circuit Court of Fayette County, in the hand writing of John Breckinridge, himself, that he 
had, in the year 1795, paid to John Lee two hundred pounds, on his and George Nicholas' joint 
bond, which left a very trifle due Lee for Breckinridge's third, and will reduce the liability of Beall 
as an under purchaser, to not more than twenty-five pounds, IN His OWN right!!! This credit the 
reverend gentleman has heretofore suppressed, with a view, no doubt, to make a better demonstra- 
tion in favor of his slight of hand decree, for $9,000 against Col. Owings,— which I had set aside* 



54 



another counsellor, and secretly and behind my back, under pretence that the bill author- 
ized a decree against T. D. Owings, who was only an under purchaser from Beall, and 
so stated in the bill to be, obtained a decree for nearly nine thousand dollars, the 
court, taking his statements as true, without looking into the papers or having them read, 
permitted him to enter up a decree for upwards of $8,000, as follows: 

Breckinridge's heirs, &c. vs. Lee's executors, &c. 

This cause having' come on to be heard, as to the defendant, Thomas Dye Owings, and it appear- 
ing to the satisfaction of the court, that the process herein has been regularly served upon him, and 
he having failed to answer the complainants bill, and amended bill, it is decreed and ordered that the 
same be taken for confessed as to him. The cause being heard upon the bills taken for confessed and 
the exhihits in the cause, and the court being now sufficiently advised of and concerning the premises, 
it is decreed and ordered that unless the defendants pay to the complainants, the gum of seventeen 
hundred and four pounds fourteen shillings and sixpence, Kentucky currency, and two hundred and 
nine dollars ninety one cents, with interest thereon at the rate oi six per cent, per annum, from the 
1st day of July, 1825, until paid; eighty five dollars forty seven and one half cents, with like interest 
from the 1st day of January, 1813, until paid; fifty two dollars twenty two cents with like interest, 
from the 1st day of January, 1822, till paid ; also fifty-two dollars thirty-nine cents, with like interest 
from the 1st day of January, 1828, until paid, together with the percentum upon seventeen hundred 
and four pounds fourteen shillings and sixpence, on or before the 1st day of the next term of this 
court, then the equity of redemption of defendant Owings, in and to the mortgaged estate in the 
complainants bill and moitgage on file herein described be barred and forever foreclosed, and that 
the same or so much 1 hereof as may be necessary, be sold for the purpose of satisfying said several 
sums to the complainants. 

A Copy.Att., H. I. BODLEY, Clerk, 
By Jo. R. Megowan, D. C. 
Decree, 7th April, 1830, for £1704 14s. 6d. Kentucky currency, with interest from July 

1, 1825, equal - $5,682 42 

To also, with interest from same time, for - 209 91 



Whole amount bearing interest from 1st July, 1825, ..... $5,892 33 

Interest to 7th of April, 1839, date of decree, 4 years, 9 months, and 7 days, - 1,678 19 

Also, with interest from 1st January, 1815, for - - * 85 41 

Interest to 7th April, 1830, 15 j ears, 3 months, and 7 days, - - - 78 31 

Also, with interest from 1st Januarv, 1822, for - - - - • 52 23 

Interest to 7th April, 1830, 8 years, "3 months, and 7 days, - - - - 25 91 

Also, 10 per cent, damages of £1,709 14s. 6d. 568 24 



Whole amount of decree, April 7, '30, $8,380 67 

Interest on $8,380 67, from 7th April, 1830 to October 7, 1841, being 11 years and 6 mos. 5,782 7S 

Amonnt due October 7, 1841, - - - $14,163 33 
In default of payment, the whole property was decreed to be sold. Although I was 
practising in court, and stood counsel, marked to the cause, so secret was the reverend 
gentleman in his movements, that I never knew that he had such a decree until the 
tenants of Ellicott and Meredith gave me notice that their tenements were advertised to 
be sold at the Bath Court house door, nearly fifty miles from my residence. I could 
not, at first believe the story, but on being told that it was on a decree of the Fayette 
Circuit Court, and on making enquiry of the clerk, I learned for the first time that the 
reverend gentleman had attempted the fraud upon both the Court and Owings. 

Not being able to see the gentleman himself, I saw his lawyer, who assured me that 
he had acted strictly under the directions of the reverend gentleman. On this informa- 
tion, I ordered my name to be stricken from the suit, and gave notice that I would bring 
the affair before the court in the morning. But the Circuit Judge who presided then, 
not being the Judge that made the decree, and only on the bench temporarily, made an 
order suspending the decree to the next Court, when the Judge from whom the decree 
was obtained, had only to be advised of the truth to set the decree aside. To this mo- 
tion, the gentleman made no resistance, and of course I exposed his conduct as little as 
I could. But had he dared to have brazened a defence, I would have moved to have had 
his name stricken from the bar. He left the bar, however, soon afterwards; and thank 
God, for my country, he has left that also. 

And after the gentleman has escaped without punishment for an act for which, if he 
had perpetrated it to its completion, he ought to have not only been dismissed from the 



55 

bar, but have been indicted, he presumes to arraign me for detecting him before he com- 
pleted a crime for which no punishment could be too severe, and he has the assurance 
to appeal to the world against my interference, because I was his counsel in the cause! 
If I was his counsel, why did he take the cause out of my hands secretly? I was not 
his counsel to impose on the court, and to aid him in stealthily obtaining, against a man 
who was undefended, more than ten times what his bill claimed of him in any event 
whatever. Suppose I was counsel for the gentleman to recover a horse, and should 
catch him stealing a horse, must I not tell on him? And what is the crime of horse 
stealing to taking a decree from the court, on a bill taken for confessed, when the bill 
claims no sum, but requires a survey to ascertain" what is due, for a sum ten times, as 
I have stated, more than in all human probability could ever be recovered? 

Suppose the gentleman had perfected his fraud, that is, on a bill taken for confessed, 
against Col. Ovvings; had taken a decree for $9,000, when not one thousand was due, 
and had sold the property of Col. Ovvings to that amount, would it have been less than 
the worst of frauds? And, gentle reader, suppose I had connived at the fraud, what a 
villain would I not be, even in my own eyes? As it regards Ovvings and his creditors, 
what a tale to be told upon myself, after forty years practice, that I had, for the reverend 
and very dear parson, only stolen from the Circuit Court a decree for $9,000! Hence* 
if I had no interest in checking the gentleman in his trickery, the honor of myself and 
of the profession required that I should stop him. I did so, and when I stated the case 
to the judge, the reverend gentleman dared not open his mouth in defence of his con- 
duct. Yes, my countymen, you all know he not only quit the court but the country 
also. 

But the gentleman says that after I was his lawyer, I was the attorney of Smith, 
Tiernan and others. Why, fellow citizens, I have exhibited my account against the 
gentleman as a lawyer for more than twenty years' service, for which he and his whole 
race have not paid me what would feed a gentleman's family one month, and if by 
engaging for him 1 was not at liberty to take fees from others, God knows I should have 
not only starved but deserved to starve, if I did not break the engagement. But "I ob- 
tained judgments and caused eighty executions to issue," says the parson. Good! "And 
Col. Owings' interests were sold in his land." Well, still good! What next; parson? 
Why, "my mortgage was oldest." Suppose it was, could not Ovvings' creditors sell 
his equity? But it was not so. Smith claimed, under the elder mortgage, and, parson, 
could not Tiernan take, on his executions, the remaining 30-48ths, on which you had 
no mortgage or claim whatever? But your doctrine is, that because your father's ad- 
ministrators held a mortgage to secure the payment of one thousand dollars, you had a 
right to slip through the court a decree for nine thousand dollars; and because your fath- 
er's administrators held a mortgage for 18-48ths of Col. Owings' property to pay that 
mortgage, that his two hundred thousand dollars worth of land, and his two hundred 
thousand dollars of creditors — all shall fly before your 9,000 dollars and sleight-of-hand 
work! Now, reader, what does the parson tell the world? W 7 hy, that he, by cer- 
tain legerdemain work, got a decree he was not entitled to: that his counsel caught him 
at the trick, and told the court on him, and the court made him give up the decree! Af- 
ter eleven years, however, the worthy parson thinks the turpitude of his conduct is 
pretty well worn out, and that he will turn the tables upon his counsel; he will insin- 
uate that but for his counsel he would have imposed on some purchaser to buy under his 
void decree, and escaped to Maryland; and that his counsel did not expose his conduct 
from virtuous and upright motives, but because he had taken an interest with his ad- 
versary; he had bttrayed him by telling the Court to look into the record, and see that 
he, the parson, had no such bill as he said he had against Owings or any body else. 
But I pronounce the statement or insinuation of the parson, that I had any adverse in- 
terest inconsistent with my duty as counsel for him, a base falsehood and subterfuge, 
without the shadow of foundation. W T hile the original bill of the administrators of 



56 



Breckinridge was dormant and never dreamt of, as necessary to be acted on, from 1811 
until about 1826, Col. Owings became embarrassed, and judgments to the amount of 
at least one hundred and fifty or two hundred thousand dollars were recovered against 
him. As attorney for Smith, Comegys, Tiernan and others, I recovered some of the 
first judgments, and issued executions for my clients, which 1 invariably ordered to be 
levied on his slaves and personal property, and which was done; but Col. Owings, un- 
der the Act of Assembly, released his slaves and other property by giving up lands, 
mostly within the Iron Works bounds. So far was I from a disposition to interfere with 
Col. Owings 1 lands, that I sued the Marshal, in the Federal Court for accepting those 
lands and releasing Col. Owings' slaves. By the Marshal's taking lands, Col. Owings 1 
other creditors got hold of his negroes and personal estate, which left my clients noth- 
ing but the land. When sales were effected, other agents bought in the lands for my 
clients, and I never was present at a sale of one acre of the Iron Works property in my 
life. Ellicott & Meredith were trustees for Sam'l Smith and the Bank of the United 
States, and they being the greatest creditors, bought up Luke Tiernan's claims to the 
property which they had bought also, and by giving a large sum, obtained from Col. 
Owings' trustees, deeds of release, and were put into possession of considerable real 
estates, but leaving out of their purchase of the lands mortgaged to Breckinridge, sub- 
ject to that mortgage before these lands were to be touched, property worth ten times 
what, by any possible issue, Breckinridge's administrators can ever recover. They set- 
tled tenants on the lands, and so occupied them until 1836.. when I became a purcha- 
ser of these lands and the whole lands acquired by the Bank of the United States, from 
Gen. Smith. Any statement or insinuation of the parson's that at any time during my 
acting as counsel for himself or his father's administrators, I had any interest in the 
lands, or common interests in the debts of my clients, exceeding a commission for col- 
lecting and paying over the monies, is utterly false; and even at this moment, I do not 
consider myself interested to the amount of a single brass farthing against the fair 
claims of the administrators to recover, as there are lands first liable to such recovery, 
to ten times the amount, in value, of any possible recovery Breckinridge's administra- 
tors can ever have, to which 1 have no claim earthly. Nor is the insinuation that he 
could have swindled some honest purchaser (if I had winked at his imposition upon 
the court in misstating his case and obtaining a fraudulent decree,) out of the amount 
decreed him, by exposing to vendue the whole Iron Works property, under a decree per- 
fectly void, founded in fact. No man, having 9,000 dollars, would have been fool e- 
nough to buy without examining the papers, when he must have detected the fraud. 
His whole pretence, therfore, that he has lost his debt or been delayed in its recovery, 
because his fraudulent decree was set aside, or that he has been prevented from recov- 
ering his debt, by any cause whatever, except his negligence and fraudulent suppres- 
sion of papers, is basely false. 

The next fabrication of the gentleman, which I will barely mention, is a statement 
that I, as attorney at law, brought suit for John Green, against his sister Letitia, 
when she was a widow, and turned her out of possessson. This is stated to prove 
that I had not been the friend to her on other occasions, especially in rescuing her ne- 
groes, men, women and children, from the grasp of her husband's creditors, and perish- 
ing, in the dead of winter, in jail, as I had stated. Were this all true, it would have 
been perfectly right and just for me, as a lawyer, to have done what he states I did for 
Green, who was my general client, and from whom I have received, in fees, thousands. 
But, reader, this is also a fabrication, and Mr. Breckinridge uttered it knowing it to be 
false, with the record before his eyes, and with a perfect knowledge, independent of the 
record, that it was false! The fact is, that while 1 was Green's lawyer, and sued for 
him, every other person on his 6,000 acre survey, lying in Fayette and Bourbon coun- 
ties, I refused to sue Mrs. Grayson, for which I was nigh an open rupture with Green, 
who threatened if I would not sue her, he would take his business out of my hands. I 



57 



told hhn to do so, if he pleased — that no consideration could induce me to bring a suit 
against her. He afterwards paid the fee of {$100 to Gen. Hardin, to sue her, which I 
had refused. For the proof of this, I again trouble the reader, to read the certificate of 
Mr. Hanna: 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA — Eighth Circuit Court, Kentucky District— Set: 

JOhS Greex, demandant, against Letitia Gravson, tenant Judgment for demandant, in 

May, 1820, on writ of right. 

I. John H. Hanna, Clerk of the Circuit Court for the District aforesaid, do certify, the declaration 
in the above named case is in the hand writing" of M. D. Hardin, and signed by said Hardin as 
attorney for said demandant) and that R. Wicklitle was not marked as the attorney for said Green in 
said case. Witness, my hand, this 8th day of September, 1841. 

JOHN H. HANNA, C. C. C. K. D. 

By N. J. Porter, D. C. 

From this it will seem that my friendship and regard for the sisfcor of the reverend 
gentleman cost me 100 dollars, and has also cost the gentleman another sacrifice of 
truth; but as this is a sacrifice he often makes, he no doubt cares little for it. 

The reverend gentleman, with a view to make an impression that his sister and him- 
self were on good terms, and that her sagacity, at an early day, made me an object of 
her suspicion and dislike, pretended lo qiiote from a private letter I wrote the gentleman 
in 1832, in which he makes me say that his sister had prejudices against myself. This 
I pronounce false. I think 1 never did or could have written to him any such thing, for 
so far as I know or believe, the reverse was the case with her, and the very last evening 
she ever spent in Lexington or its vicinity, was at my own house, where I entertained 
her as a relation and friend; and well do I recollect that when she was about to leave, and 
I asked her when I should again have the pleasure of seeing her in Kentucky, she re- 
plied, she knew not; that while she had many valued relations, and me and my family 
were among them, she was treated badly by some of her relations, and she was sorry to 
say her brother Bob was among them; that she was mortified to think that her husband 
could not attend her on a visit to her friends, without being pursued, as he was, by her 
uncle and brother, for Grayson's debts; that on the day before, a writ had been served 
upon General Porter, and she believed they were at the bottom of the business; that she 
had found out why it was that Robert was so importunate with her husband to pay Gen. 
Breckinridge, Grayson's debt; that Gent Breckinridge had promised the money to him, 
if he could prevail on Gen. Porter to pay the dbmand he had against Grayson's estate — 
of all Which I had a perfect knowledge, for the reverend gentleman had, but a few days 
before, applied to me to ride out to Cabell's Dale, to aid in influencing Gen. Porter to 
assume the payment of a large demand which Gen. Breckinridge held against Alfred 
Grayson's estate, stating that he had sold his land on Beargrass to his uncle, to be paid 
for, in part, out of the money to be received from General Porter, which his sister had 
promised him her husband should pay, but which she would not then consent he should 
pay. And this praying hypocrite knows he parted with that sister in such relations to- 
wards him, and I believe they were never changed during her life. His relations to her 
husband are not, or were not, when I saw Gen. Porter last, any better. But the gen- 
tleman has maliciously brought before the public his sister's name, With that of her 
relation, my late wife, with a view to force me to go into a detail of a separation between 
two early friends and relatives, and to effect his object, gave a garbled statement of my 
letter, [feel myself constrained to silence on that subject, except to declare that what 
separated them arose only from wounded pride on the part of one, and wounded sensi- 
bility on that of the other; and that although their intercourse was interrupted, 1 believe 
the kindest feelings and sympathies for each other's welfare were never for one moment 
suspended between them. 1 make this statement as a reason for my not condescending 
to notice, in detail, the gentleman's base attempt to make the impression that between 
his sister and myself there ever w as one moment's suspension of kindness and courtesy* 
My letter to him was private, and told him what he personally knew; and, if he Were 



8 



58 



a gentleman, he would either keep it for hie own eye, as a personal affair between him 
and me, or publish it entire, and not in garbled and false extracts. 

As this gentleman has thought proper to unceremoniously bring up his sister's rela* 
tions and mine, and, to make capital out of them, has stated positive falsehoods, I will, 
as a set-off, give the reader a statement that can be verified by record and written evi- 
dence. The father of the gentleman left two large bodies of rich lands, the one in the 
valley of the Elkhorn, and the other in the valley of Beargrass. Out of these bodies of 
land, each child was provided with a tract of rich and valuable land. The younger 
brother took his tract around the mansion and the grave of his father. Letitia, the 
sister, however, lost by an adversary claim, so much of her land as left her without a 
home, at all events without one equal to the lands allotted to the other children. James 
died childless, about the time Letitia lost her land; but instead of this trustee and 
brother offering her James' share, and throwing her little fragment left into the general 
fund, he, by variouS devices, attempted to pass off upon her, lands in Ohio and on Green 
River, of not only bad soil but disputed titles. 

While Gen. Porter's papers were before me, I discovered a correspondence between 
him and the reverend gentleman, and perhaps his brothers, in which Gen. Porter suggests 
that Letitia or her heirs will be satisfied with James' share, and relinquish the fragment 
allotted to her. At this the gentleman took fire, and wrote that such an 
arrangement could not take place; 'for,' says this pious son of the church, <I never can 
consent that that tract which contains the mansion and grave of my father shall be pos- 
sessed by any but a descendant of my father, and such descendant must bear my father's 
name.' On reading this letter, I was brought to doubt whether the being, at last, 
amidst his evil propensities, had not some ennobling quality. I thought that I saw 
plainly that his intentions were that the son of the elder brother, bearing not only his 
grandfather's name, but very much his impress, should, by the assent of all, take it and 
perpetuate the remembrance and guard the bones of his parents. But, reader, judge my 
surprise, when Gen. Porter, seeing me pause after reading the letter, said: "Sir, what 
think you of that, when I tell you that that man has actually sold his interest in his 
father's mansion and this tract of James' over his mother's head!" Yes, reader, believe 
it — this pious son, who charges me with avarice, after playing off upon his brother-in- 
law this pious hoax about his reverence for his father's home and grave, has, for the mere 
love of gold, sold over the head of his mother, his interest in the very house in which he 
was born! Had he done this before he plundered his aunt of Brsedalbane, and before 
his father-in-law made him rich, the world might excuse him; but, to his shame, when 
rendered affluent, he, to get more money, sells the home of his mother, she living and 
giving bim white washing certificates; and, for the same love of money, as far as de- 
pends on him, the sun of Cabell's Dale is forever set; the gardens and orchards laid out 
and planted by his father, will pass into stranger hands; and the elder male of the eldest 
son, instead of reviving the glories of Cabell's Dale, may wend his way to Iowa, or 
some new region, for a home, bearing off from the State and from the family the image 
and the name of John Breckinridge! Now, gentle reader, is not Mr. Robert J. Breck- 
inridge a beautiful creature to charge me with the love of gold, when he has literally 
sold the bones and ashes of his mother, father, sister and brother; for although he re- 
serves the right of way for his father's decendants to visit the grave yard, yet who of 
them will ever tread across the freehold of another to the graves of their illustrious an- 
cestry 1 The reservation is a piece of hypocrisy. He cared not for his father's grave. 
It was the cash he wanted when he sent his sister into Ohio for land, and it was cash 
he wanted when he sold his interest in James' estate! 

I am wearied with noticing the gentleman's personalities, I think I have proven Mr. 
Breckinridge, in too many ways, and that by public records and written evidence, to be 
destitute of veracity, for it to be necessary for me to deny or refute more of what he has 
said of me. I have already written and said .too much for the reader's appetite for ( 



59 

things merely personal. Yet, the reader may ask me to account to him why it is that 
Mr. Breckinridge has been so elaborate in trying to prove by his mother, by his brother- 
in-law, by his brothers, and by his old tutor, Dr. Marshall, that I have erred in my state- 
ments about matters of so little concern to the public. I answer, that he made those 
little issues (such as whether I visited his father's at his burial, or ever saw him while 
he was sick, or ever had a family intimacy with his father,) because from their insignifi- 
cance and long standing, they would be difficult of proof, and if from death or otherwise, 
I failed to account for the minutest transaction by proof, he would be in some measure 
revenged on me for the ravages I made upon his veracity at the eourt house when he 
dared to meet me face to face, and to utter falsehoods that he supposed 1 could not detect, 
a few of which I will state, that the reader may the better comprehend the gentleman. 
For instance, the gentleman set out by denying that he had ever said that the descend- 
ants of female slaves, in Kentucky, born since the constitution was formed, were not 
slaves under the constitution. I proved that he had said so from under his own signa- 
, ture published in the Reporter in 1830. He denied that he had ever contended that the 
Legislature could set such slaves free without paying the owners. I proved this false 
from the same publication. He declared that I was the only man in America who had 
t ever charged him with abolitionism. This I proved false, from page 108 of his very 
i "literary and pious" Magazine, of March, 1838, where he himself published that he was 
I charged with abolition by the Rev. Mr. Hutchison, a Presbyterian Parson, of Peters- 
I burg, and by Thomas Shore, Postmaster, at the same place, and by referring to the fact 
| that the citizens of Petersburg had burnt his books upon the public square, for containing 
i abolition doctrines. He denied that the General Assembly of the Prosbyterian Church 
had ever considered of the subject of universal emancipation. I proved this statement 
! false, by reading a statute or resolution of the General Assemby, passed in the year 
i 1818, denouncing slavery as an evil politically, morally and religiously, and declaring it 
to be the duty of all Christians to do their utmost to abolish it. The parson denied that 
I he had ever encouraged the British to interfere with negro slavery in America, but stated 
that when in Europe he had denied their right to do so, and had in all his public acts and 
i speeches, vindicated the slaveholder's rights. 1 proved this false, by reading from his 
I Glasgow speech, published by himself, as followeth: 

"Mr. Breckinridge said be had no intention to attempt a mitigation of their hatred of 
j slavery, and if at some future time he should meet, in America, any one then present, 
I he would prove to them by the friendship of those who loved and respected him, and 
I the opposition of those that did not, that he hated slavery in itself, as much as any of 
I those present could do so. I am a man, said he, and consider nothing that relates to 
I man foreign to me. He did not wish them not to interfere with America. He admit- 
I ted their right to interfere. The sending out agents, he said, was one of the great 
I lines of operation attempted upon the Americans. He declared in the presence of his 
God, that there was hardly a man in the free States, who did not wish the world rid of 
j slavery, and he believed the same of large minorities in the States in which slavery ex- 
I isted." 

He denied that the Presbyterian Churches in America and those of Scotland had 
ever held any communications with each other, through messengers, on the subject of 
slavery. To prove this false, I read from his own speech, where he exclaims; 

"Why need you be deceived] You have sent four messengers from your churches to 
ours, and I am now the fourth messenger sent from our churches to you ; and is the voice 
of one rash and passionate man to overbear the voices of the remaining eight, when of 
the whole nine he alone handled money in the transaction, and he alone was unsent by 
I the churches'? History sheds on this subject a broad and steady light, and sheds one 
j unchanging lesson — domestic slavery cannot exist forever — terminate it must — witness 
St. Domingo!" 

These, with many other palpable contradictions to the gentleman's statements at. 



60 



the Court-house, moet assuredly required an answer, but how could he answer? His 
own speeches were the witnesses against him, that he had gone over to Europe, had 
made efforts to supersede George Thompson, had explained to the English nation why 
he would not do, and advised them not only to change their man, but also their mode of 
operation upon the tenure of slavery in America. Yes, the reverend orator cheered 
them with repeated assurances that nearly every man in all the free States, and that 
large minorities in the slave States, were doing all they could in aiding them in their 
operetions through their agents and messengers sent to stir up the n on -slaveholders and 
the slaves against the masters. Nor did the pious Doctor Breckinridge forget to com- 
plain that Thompson got all the money in the transaction. With these things unex- 
plainabje, it is easy to see why the gentleman has attempted to draw off the public mind 
from what interests the public, their property and institutions, to myself. 

I trust I have satisfied my friends and all impartial men again, that he is not only & 
reckless slanderer, but an abolitionist; but, for the eye of the religionist, and particular- 
ly for the eyes of the Presbyterians of the Synod of Kentucky, I feel myself called upon 
to publish a part of the proceedings of the Synod of Kentucky, for the year 1833: 

"OVERTURE No. 1, on the subject of slavery, postponed from last synod, together with a substi- 
tute then offered, were read; when it was agreed that the substitute be now considered, It was as 
follows: 

Resolved, That in the view of this synod, slavery, as it exists within our hounds, is a great moral 
evil, and inconsistent with the word of God, a^d we do therefore recommend to all our ministers and 
members who h.old slaves, to endeavor to have them instructed in the knowledge of the Gospel; and 
to promote, in every peaceable way, the interests of the Colonization Society ; and to favour a}l 
proper measures for gradual voluntary emancipation." pp. 28, 2$. 

"The following preamble and resolution was offered and adopted: 

Inasmuch as in the judgement of this Synod, it is inexpedient to come to any decision on the very 
difficult and delicate question of slavery, as it exists within our bounds, therefore, 
Resolved, That the whole subject be indefinitely postponed. 
Yeas 41, -Nays 36, Non-Liquet\ 1. p. 31." 

The above is a true copy from the minutes of the Synod of Kentucky, vol. 5, for the yenr, 1833, a^t 
its session in Lexington, October 9th, of said year. Attest— R. DAVIDSON, 

Lexington, Sept. 15, 1841. Stated Clerk of Svnod. 



DbAR S|R:— -On an examination of the records of the Synod at its sessions in Lexington, Ky., ii> 
1833, it does not appear who was the mover of the substitute, but that the Rev. R. J. Breckinridge 
advocated it wjth great zeal I was informed by those who heard his speech. 1 was not a member op, 
that occasion, but feeling a deep interest on that particular subject, I attended as closely as I could, 
and at the close of the discussion, whether before or immediately after the vote was taken I cannot 
be positive, the Rev. R. J. B. arose about the centre of the house, took his hat, and marching down 
the aisle, said, with an audible voice, ''God has left you, and I also will now leave you, and have no 
more correspondence with you." And fron^ that time to this, he has, as far as I know, kept his word. 
His brother, the Rev. W. L., was at the time, the Moderator, and called order repeatedly, but the Rev. 
R.J. marched heedlessly on. This is a true statement of what 1 saw and heard. 

September 16th, 1841. JAS. LOGAN. 

Here is a fine specimen of the gentleman and parson. A resolution is offered that negro slavery 
is contrary to the word of God. The Synod, after two years deliberation, at their meeting in Lex- 
ington, in the year 1833, by a close vote, postponed its consideration, when this young scion of your 
church, on whom the pin feathers of religion had not had time to grow since he quit the Faro ba^ks, 
takes up his hat, struts down the aisle of your Church, crying aloud to the whole Synod, "God has 
left you, and I also will now leave you and have no morejeorrespondence with you!*' This is your 
pious parson, Presb) terians, that t«lls you I am the enemy of your Church. Have I eversaid thug 
much of you? True, he has called me many hard names, and made me bad enough, but not half so 
bad, as he has declared you, to be. In the presence of the Synod, before the fathers of the church, 
and the ministers of your holy religion — in the presence of the gazing crowd of bye-standers, h$ 
denounces you, one and all, of the Kentucky Synodical body, God-forsaken wretches, and declares 
as Qod has forsaken you, he will hold no farther communion with you — and all this because you 
would not, at his bidding, vote that all slave-holders were God-forsaken wretches, living under th? 
curse of sin, and if dying so, must go to hell, of course. Is it so then, that you still cherish this man 
in your bosom? Is it true that you stand all this, and still nurse the viper that has slung the church 
as well as the Kentucky Synod, with his withering venom. Where, where is the Presbyterian church, 
and who has caused its desolation? Where are the venerable fathers, the Oelands of the church, 
that 4^opd prominent as pillars of the Presbyterian religion? Are they among you? No, they 
are driven from the church of their fathers, by this b«ingwho denounces you, (even you that he stirs 
up against me,) as God-forsaken and unworthy of his association ! You have suffered this Ishmael to 
«tir up broi|s aniongyou, and $e{ Ptesb) terian upon Presbyterian, until the war rages from Maine to 



61 



New Orleans — a war of extermination, and the question is, which of the great divisions of the 
church shall annihilate the other. 

You are now too much engaged with the gentleman at your head, to attend to the Catholic war 
he waged for you. But, as many of you.your wives and daughters are somewhat interested, I present 
y»uwith a specimen of your pious clergyman's talents at misrepresentation, and 1 still hope there 
are many pious Presbyterians who will condemn it as 1 do. I also wish, in presenting this piece to 
the public, that the citizens of Lexington, as well as other Christians, may know what an impious 
wretch is fostered and permitted to preach in the Churches of the living God, in this city. In the 
gentleman's Magazine, of March, 1838, the religious public will liud the gentleman, under his own 
authority and word, publishes as followeth, of the city of Lexington: 

AN UPROAR IN MISTAKE, 

OB BISHOP PURC ELL'S FIRST KENTUCKY CONSECRATION. 

About the beginning of December last, there occurred at Lexington, in Kentucky, one of those 
indescribable scenes, which a sudden and causeless panic sometimes produces, and by which the 
long projected, and carefully got up show, of consecrating a papal chapel, was turned into a most 
uproarious affair. Nobody was seriously injured, as we have reason to believe. Multitudes had 
hearty laughs afterwards at what befelthem there; and this good resulted from the threatened evil, 
that the whole affair became a subject of ridicule, instead of an engine for promoting papal influence 
in that delightful town. We will recount the matter, out of lack of capacity for more weighty 
business, during an hour of bodily and mental lassitude. 

In an outlot of the town there did indeed stand a small chapel , where a few Romans, as the people 
called them, met in shy privacy, once in a year or two, and there went through certain queer facings 
and wheelings which made the boys wonder. And there were a few, but very few people — decent, 
but only a handful — old Mr, Tibbats the baker, old Jerry Murphy the constable, old Mr. Hickey 
the whitesmith, and a few others, who privately professed this uncouth faith. 

Thus matters stood, for a long, long time. At length, about six years ago. the papists seem to 
have made a simultaneous movement all over the country, and the city ol Lexington was one of the 
solected fields of their labors, for converting back the American people to king craft, priest craft, 
and we know not what besides. Suddenly there appeared there priests and nuns in any desirable 
quantity. How strange it is, these priests and nuns should forswear each others society and yet 
constantly stick together — renounce each other's company and yet never be found apart! But no 
matter. They came to Lexiugion merely to do good. Were so anxious to nurse the sick; so devo^ 
ted to orphans; so eager to teach schools; that is, however — and it is very odd, only to care for 
protestant sick, feed protestant orphans, and teach protestaht schools. 

In the twinkling of an eye, all things were changed. Those who weie secret Romans before, 
came openly forth; those who were luke- warm, became bold; those who were careless, became 
excessively pious, particularly after grog-time of day. Property which was supposed to belong to 
Mr. Such-a-One, was fou»d to have always been the heritage of the church; accommodations for the 
sisters, and possibly for a few others not so certainly sisters, were at once erected, and arrangements 
made to erect anew church in the town. This is all the common course of things— only at Lexing- 
ton, after all the raking and scraping, not half enough Romans could be got to fill the little old houso 
in the back lotas you went the back way to Fowler's garden; and therefore, a big chapel, erected 
in the city, and holding itself forth with much pretension, could be, of course, only an engine for 
proselyting, of rather more than ordinary boldness. However, so the affair was. And what with 
contributions coerced out of liberal protestants on false pretences, and taxes levied on the faithful 
throughout that diocess, and alms contributed by the Leopold foundation, and otfeer foreign associa- 
tions — the chapel at last approached its completion, and in the autumn of 1837, the grand event of 
its consecration was to occur. 

This whole matter of religious juggling is to us, a great barbarism; doubtless we are great barba- 
rians to it. But the idea of baptising a bell, sanctifying a house or a grave yard — blessing cups and 
plates, pow-wowing over bits of ware or mettle, and such nonsense, is too silly to amuse grown chil- 
dren with — and worse than ridiculous, when used as a means of pleasing God, and obtaining his 
favor. The Romans at Lexington thought otherwise, and we are clear tor their right to think as they 
please; only give us also our right to think of their thoughts with the same freedom. 

In due time, all their arrangements were made. The chapel was fixed off', all just so. The doll- 
babies all dressed up — the long white sticks, with wax ends, all set about the altar, to give light in the 
day time. The little boys and their bells to jingle, and their crimped white overshirts,as nice as could 
be. Every thing prim and snug; and all the sisters dying with anxiety, and all the fathers chuckling 
at the coming glorification. The music and themachinery to praise God withal, tried and re-tried; 
all right; every part practised; all perfect. — Alas! that even the consecration of a chapel should be 
subject to chance and fear! Alas! that the best concerted schemes should be liable to derangement 
— yea, to sad and signal failure!! Time and tide pause not on their ceaseless course. The eventful 
day at last arrived. Hie musicians were at their posts. The fathers were in their best array of 
white and red, and scarlet and violet, cut into all sorts of fantastic shapes. The people streamed 
into the chapel, and filled it full, jam, cram full. In came the gang ot operators, boys, lads, men; 
white, parti-colored, red; deacons, priests, and the Bishop John of Cincinnati at their head — in they 
came, all bowing and scraping towards the long white sticks with the wax ends — and all dodging and 
capering like ducks in a thunderstorm. All looked theit prettiest; and at their head Bishop Purcell, 
as we have said, demure and prim as his ''princely grace" himself of Vienna, who about that very 
time, got his cis-Atlaatic brother "successor" of the Apostles into so sad a scrape about those naughty 



62 



Ohio free schools. By-thc-bye, speaking of successors, we incline to think, Bishop Purcell has ex- 
hibited better evidence of being Peter's successor than most of the Popes of Rome ever did. We 
mean not his successor as Apostle, nor preacher, nor christian ; but as to the fact of being caught in 
a tremendous say-one-thing-to-day-and-another-to-morrow! Few popish Bishops show much regnv- 
blance to converted Peter. Bishop Purcell seems very like Peter, when denying with oaths, his own 
words and deeds! But we wander. The house is full, and the scenes are begun. The censors are 
lighted ; the doll-babies are netting smoked ; the incense is rising in clouds as they passed down the 
crowded aisles. A chap i n the gallery seeing the smoke, shouts Fire! A centinel fixed aloft to sound 
the bell at the proper period, in hastening up or down, broke a round in a ladder at the very moment, 
and fell heavily against a stove pipe in the gallery. The gallery is falling! Fire! The gallery is fall- 
ing! Fire! Fire! The scene that followed beggars all description. We will only attempt to give 
an impression of some portions of it. The crowd rushed down the aisles, down the gallery step9 
towards the outer doors, over each other, upon each other, pell mell, man, woman and chili —white, 
black and yellow, gentle and simple, rush, rush, rush! Fire! the gallery is falling! Bonnetsare 
twisted awry — down shoulder pads, and mutton leg sleeves are mashed up — sattin slippers are bad 
protectors for toes under other peoples' heels — fine fabrics that were dresses, are hardly to be called 
so now. Skin for skin, saith Job, "all that a man hath" (yea, and the ladies too, even their finery) 
"will he give for his life." Mr. J. ran and jumped through a window. Miss W. mounted the window 
sill, and in the extacy of terror, patted juber. Mrs. B. was thrown down and walked over, in defi- 
ance both of prayers and other somewhat different remonstrances. Mrs. V. standing on the back of 
a pew, wasknocked head foremost oventwo, into the third. The Misses S. were shocked into stupor, 
by the want of calmness in others. And Jake Hostetter declared, that when he was squeezed through 
the front door, a pile of women five feet high, was lying before it. But where were the reverend fa- 
thers? Their instant and universal impression seems to have been, that it was all a premeditated affair 
— and that a protestant mob was about to Lynch the whole brotherhood. A guilty conscience needs 
no accuser. In this idea, the head shepherd, played the hireling and put off. "Holy Virgin Mary," 
cried Bishop Purcell, "pity and save us;" and suiting the action to the word, he made himself scarce 
through a side door, and was seen no more. One priest, still more alarmed, it was said, escaped from 
the house, and was caught half deranged with fright, and half dead with the unusual labor, puffing 
and running, in full canonicals, in the suburbs of the city, and with great difficulty was soothed and 
brought back. A third, perhaps the incumbent of the place, more resolute began a harangue to the 
protectant spectators, who composed at least nineteen twentieth of the audience, the purport of 
which, was to remind them, that they at least, were in no danger — as dogs never eat dogs — and there- 
fore protestants would not mob protestants. We grieve to say, the inference did not commend itself 

to the affrighted multitude. But Col. S , taking the idea, possibly from the priest's attempt, 

came forward into the chancel, and would have mounted the pulpit, in order to speak to the people, 
and restore order. Sacrilegious attempt! Vain thought! It was a consecrated pulpit, that far the 
work was completed; and better let the whole perish than permit a heretick to set foot in that holy 
place, and boldly and successfully did the father resist the unbelieving protestant ; and onward raged 
the storm. Impelled by a similar idea, a German musician in the gallery leaned over the rail and be- 
gan to shout in a lingo which nobody comprehended, that there was nothing to be feared : but his 
looks, gestures, and tones, betokened that every thing was to be feared . Whereupon the fright ©nty 
the more increased, and when, as a last resort the orchestra struck up its various and discordant fones, 
to soothe and quiet, or at least disenchant the crowd of its terrible panic, the uncertain sounds> 
frightful and unlookedfor, augmented a confusion, now thribly unfounded. 

At length however, the terrible scene passed off, one by one, through doors and windows, the gaily 
dressed crowd sallied forth rumpled, agitated, and fatigued. And when the last had escaped, it was- 
found, but apparently not before, that the house was not burned, and that the gallery had not fallen I 

First came the hour of inquiries. And like the formal report of a Colonel, when the army lay at 
Norfolk during the last war, this contest, like his, resulted in there being — killed, none; wounded, 
none ; missing, none ! Frightened to death, and befooled out of their wits, almost all ! 

Now, Christians, in sober seriousness, if a preacher can write such falsehoods to abuse and morti- 
fy a city, to vent his venom upon an unoffending Christian community, and still hold fellowship with 
Christians, what will worldlings say of Christianity? Will they not think that religion is, likethe 
parson's tale, all a hoax? When a pious, prayerful parson calls the Apostle Peter a perjured liar, 
what will an unconverted man think of this head of the church, and the church itself, if Christ de- 
livered the keys of salvation to a perjured liar? And you, people of Lexington, what think you. of 
the parson's describing Miss W. as playing the negro wench and patting juber to the assembled mul- 
titude, whom he figures forth as a crowd of negroes at a negro dance? And say, you sons of chivalry, 
why have you been silent while an aged and venerable, but desolate widow of one of the first men of 
the nation, and she of perfectly pure character, the daughter of a patriot and the sister of patriots, is 
bruited in the parson's Herald of slander, and held up to the world as a subject of ridicule and of 
vulgar mirth? Who is this Mrs. V., that she figures with Jake Hostetter in the gentleman's pious 
Herald? And, citizens of Lexington, how do you stand by and allow this forger of tales to hold you 
and your fellow-citizens, your wives and your daughters, up to scorn and derision? And you, reli- 
gious of all orders, how do you extend to this being the hand of Christian fellowship, when you have 
read this, and know full well, that the whole tale of the flight of the Bishop and of the clergy ; in fine, 
that the piece is a mass of corrupt and malignant falsehoods. While you tolerate these falsehoods 
and slurs upon the ancient chuich of Christ, are you not doing irreparable injury to all religion? 
The Catholics are Chrijtians ; then- church embraces nearly three-fourths of the christian world , they 
have in past ages been the founders of Christianity and civilization ; they fought the battles of our in- 
dependence, side by side with Protestants; they are our fellow-citizens, and deserve to be treated as 



63 



ourselves— and yet has this scorner held up the whole city of Lexington, aa well ab Catholics, ta 
scorn and derision ! 

And this is the man who arraigns nie, and who, even in Lexington, lias found his aiders and abet- 
tors. I have again laid him bare before an impartial world. I have stripped him ©f all claims to 
character or truth, and now hand him over to the scorn and contempt of the honest man, and to the 
abhorrence ol the real Christian. Your fellow-citizen, 

R. VVICKLIFFE. 



ADDENDA. 



I have felt it due to the high character and chivalrous spirit of the Hon. John Ro WAN, to add 
the following letter which he has done me the honor to write me, on seeing that the reverend gen- 
tleman had taken leave gratuitously to use his name. It was my original intention not to notice 
the vile insinuation of the parson, that 1 had, on sundry occasions, particularly in the case of Mr. 
Rowan, like himself, played the poltroon. In the other cases mentioned, the gentleman referred 
to some persons that I scarcely knew; to some with whom I never had a difference in all my life; 
and to some from whom I could not have accepted a defiance, without disgracing myself by the 
acceptance; but from neither had lever an application for a duel. Indeed, Mr. Rowan is, accord- 
ing to my best recollection, the only man, among the living or dead, 1 hat ever called on me for 
honorable satisfaction. This, as an honorable man, I was not at liberty to refuse. It is now 
nearly thirty-five years since our misunderstanding was, in the presence of our mutual friends, (B8 
honorable and brave men ever settle such controversies,) adjusted. Our friends have both passed 
to the grave, which deprives us of the only evidences that in the affair neither of us desired nor 
would have accepted other than honorable terms of accommodation. If, at this time of life, any 
thiBg was wanting to prove him to have been chivalrous and brave, the honorable testimony he 
has been pleased to give of the conduct of his adversary, will, with all honorable and brave men, 
be conclusive evidence. Ever since the affair alluded to happened, the personal relations between 
Mr. Rowan and myself have been friendly; but from youth to old age we have been opposed to 
each other in politics. This gave the gentleman some hopes that he would find, in the public 
credulity, a point on which he might impress his slander. But the creature reasoned from a false 
basis, he consulted his own corrupt and cowardly heait, and reflected what he would do, were he 
in Mr. Rowan's cendition. Mr. Rowan's letter is as follows: 

Louisville, November 30th, 1841. 

Dear Sir: 

Having, within a few days past, thrown my eye over a publication of the Rev. R. J. Breckinridge 
against you, I was surprised to perceive that he had introduced my name, in reference to a dispute 
which occurred between you and myself more than twenty years ago, and insinuated strongly, 
that in the adjustment of that dispute, which took place very shortly after its occurrence, you had 
displayed a disreputable pusillanimity. It occurred to me, that it was alike due to you and to my- 
self, to declare that throughout that unpleasant affair, you maintained the post and bearing of an 
honorable man; and that it was settled, and amity restored betwen us, without the slightest dis- 
paragement of yournonor or chivalry. 1 had not thought of the matter for many years, and never, 
since the adjustment, injuriously, in reference to you. 

You can make any use you please of this communication. 

Very respectfully, yours, 

Robert Wickliffe, Esq. JOHN ROWAN. 



As I have spoken of ray refusal, (on being satisfied that the claim set up by the heirs of Mr. 
Breckinridge to Mrs. Meredith's land, was unjust) to proceed farther against her, though urged to 
do so by her nephew ; and as I have also declared that if I had discovered the original bond between 
Walter Beall & George Nicholas and John Breckinridge, (in which John Breckinridge expressly 
stipulated that he would never look to Walter Beall, if the 600 aeres of land on the Kentucky 
river was lost,) I would have done as I did in the Meredith case, that is, refused my aid in forcing 
the debt of .£1000, claimed to be due by reason of a failure of title in the six hundred acre sur- 
vey, I deem it proper to explain not only what I did, but what I considered myself at liberty to 
do. First, I do not wish to be understood as claiming the right of a lawyer to abandon his client 
whenever he discovers he has an unjust cause, but that he is, notwithstanding such opinion, bound 
by his contract to his client, until he completes the service he has undertaken, so long as his client 
deals fairly with him. When 1 brought the ejectment against Samuel Meredith, I had nothing before 
me but the mortgage and the statement of Cabell Breckinridge that Meredith was in possession 
and refused to give it up. I brought the suit and obtained the judgment, when Sam'l Meredith 
filed a bill. In this suit I was also engaged for the heirs, and succeeded. After its terminus, Mrs. 
Meredith (whom I well knew to be not only a woman of perfect veracity but of exemplary piety,) 
scught an interview with me at my own house, and stated not only the facts stated in her bill, but 
others connected with the transaction, which, together with what was proven in the Sam'l Mere- 



64 



dith case, convince!) ine that the claim was a most iuiquitous one, and that all that was wanting 
Was an able counsellor to hie a bill for her to have the trust declared. Yet, while I had discharged 
my obligations to the Breckinridges, I could not, as an honorable man, give her counsel as to her 
rights. But I had a right to refuse any new engagements against either Breckinridge or Meredith. 
Thus, when Mr. Bieckinridge first spoke to me to bring suit against Meiedith, I refused, and 
he employed Mr. Chinn to bring his suit for profits. The death of Meredith abated that suit, and. 
as the law then stood, put an end to all remedies for the mesne profits and tresspasses complained 
of. It was between the death of Meredith and the obtaining of the release of Mrs. Mereeith.by 
the reverend gentleman, that he again applied to me to sue his aunt for the mesne profits, tress* 
pass, &c, and with much earnestness urged the claims of himself and the other heirs on me to act 
as counsel. This I positively refused to do. At this time, it seems, Mr. Barry had brought suit 
for Mrs. Meredith, to have the trust executed, of which I never was informed) until I found the 
bill and release of Mrs. Meredith, which I have already exhibited. And* I doubt no more than 1 
do that she was greatly overreached in giving the release* that the parson told her that I had con- 
sented toj and had actually brought a reaction against her for tresspass nnd the mesne profits. The 
reader may ask, why do you say this? I answer, first, because it was necessary to frighten her in 
some way; and, secondly the man Who would state one falsehood to do so, would not hesitate to 
state another. The reader hasse'en that in the face of the release, jBreckinridge agrees to dismiss 
his action of trespass and for rents and profits, when in truth neither he nor his father's heirs had 
such action depending, and when I had told him, what every lawyer knows, that he could maintain 
no such action against Mrs. Meredith. I knew Mrs. Meredith well, and although in her domestic 
intercourse she was sensible and accomplished, she was ignorant of law and the usage of courts, 
and easily persuaded to believe that a case in court would be decided more from the ability tif the 
lawyer than its merits. Her brother and husband were dead, and if her brother's heirs had enga- 
ged myself, on whose friendship, in ordinary cases, she could rely, and on whose ability I know- 
she placed a very high estimates-much, very much too high — she felt herself Without protection, 
and at the mercy of the parson, and thought it better tu lose her land, than to risk the land and 
ruin for back rents, ana thus signed the fatal deed that took from her and her children forever, her 
claim to the land. 

In the prosecution of the claim against Beall, I believed the only question was his capacity to 
make the mortgage, and I acted upon the principle that whether he was insane er not, he owed the 
thousand pounds, and ought to pay it. But the discovery of the original bond and the the testimo- 
ny now show that not a cent was due Mr. Breckinridge, and that Beall was a luriatic when the mort- 
gage, in which Beall acknowledged the thousand pounds to be due, was executed . This is now the 
naked state of the case . If Mr. Breckinridge were alive* he might, and I hope would assign at 
least a claim that would satisfy an honorable mind for his conduct. I have ever i herished for him* 
While living, and for his memory, since his death, the highest veneration ; and riothing but to defend 
ttiy self arid an injured brother from theslanders of Robert J. Breckiniidge could have indheed me 
to lay bare the claim on which I have been th<3 unfortunate instrument of Wringing from Beall's 
devisees and others, for the heirs of John Bieckinridge, nearly three thousand pounds! 

The reader will have observed that Mr. Breckinridge insinnates in his book that Charl»s A . 
Wicklifle had. by his improper conduct, in running tip Ormsby's lot, given his father's heirs all the 
trouble, difficulties ancV delays they had to encounter, and that he had done so to relieve his own 
lot from the mortgage, to refute which I first filed Cabell Breckinridge's letters, agreeing in no 
event to sell his (Charles A. Wickliffe's) lot, and I have been further compelled to file the origin- 
al agreement between Beall & Breckinridge, in which Breckinridge agrees to take the six hun- 
dred acres of laud, without recourse to Bealli in arty event whatever; and then the depositions 
showing Beali's condition when the mortgage was taken from him. To prove how necessary it 
was for me to advise the employment of my brother, and to so distribute the losses as to prevent a 
combination of the lot-holders against Breckinridge's claim, the plan I devised was carried out, 
aiid about three thousand pounds realized to Breckinridge's heirs, upon as iniquitous a claim as 
the world ever witnessed, so far as the papers now shew. In the employment of Charles A. Wick- 
lifle, I knew I should deprive him of abetter fee from the citizens of Bardstown, and that I should 
cause him to incur the ill will of Beall and perhaps others, but my friendship for the Breckinridges 
induced me to doit. He had been raised among and honored by the people of Bardstown and its 
vicinity, and was the schoolfellow and cotemporary of young Beall; yet on my request, ^being his 
oldest bsother,) he consentedto forego his chance for better fees and good will from his neighbors, 
and engaged for the Breckinridges, not as agent, but as counsel. But when the day of sale came, 
on, Cabell Breckinridge saddled him with the entire agency, he failing to attend, and thus placed 
my brother in the unenviable condition of following the cryer or bell man throughout the town of 
Bardstown, as bidder and agent for the complainants, bidding for and buying (over the heads of his 
neighbors and constituents,) their houses, until he brought into the Beeckinridge fund full six 
thousand dollars, besides four thousand acres of land. This I know he did because he was younger 
than myself, and knew not how to refuse my request: and in the act he incurred the enmity of 
Samuel Beall and Peter B. Ormsby, which ended only with their lives. And yet, for this service, 
he has received no compensation but the base insinuations of the slanderer that he had abused his 
trust, and a lot not worth fifty dollars, for which 1 have credited (and the reverend gentleman has 
accepted the credit) two hundred and sixty-five dollars; so that in point of fact, the reverend par- 
son has, for the whole services performed by myself and my brother, paid not one farthing, and I 
am $265 out of pocket. li W. 



112 



tim* 



\-my \#/ vw vwi 



V % • 





,44 





p. * XN * 



,4 4 



-♦ > 






V 








? ^ --w^ /\ 

? Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 

rt Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide • 

* • » * Treatment Date: May 2006 

^ *rfC^fpA s> ^ * %il ^8KS* ^ A <4 *!f0 PreservationTechnologies f. 

• (SwJ^W/ft • <^PH^^s> *" \ftt' «^ A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION r 



A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066 
(724) 779-2111 




6 



\w -w- • 




*° °* ° #l ^ 



>* \<f W \ 




,4 : 



1 ^ <^ * 




* o 




o? "V'^V' ^V'^V^ V* 




•0* 



if 



A* 



*- -r .... 




MAR 82 



N. MANCHESTER 
INDIANA 46962 



4 9* 




J 1 



